When your older, you will have issues with sperm count and testosterone levels. But luckily we have HRT clinics and sperm banks. Hopefully people will take both arguments and come up with their own logical conclusion instead of just believing what I, or anyone else says at face value
Ok, I assumed that this was opinion, but wanted to make sure. Certainly you understand that 250mg is not anywhere the amount needed to see growth and that test is not the only factor, but just a part of the equation. Also, I am not sure where you are getting your data regarding HPTA, but it is not accurate.
If you're going to point something out for being "broscience" at least actually refute the point
Yeah he will be suppressed all year round. So what? What are the negative health effects from being suppressed year round when you're taking testosterone anyway? Do TRT patients also get these alleged "health effects"? I have no idea what negative health effects you're talking about from running a cc a week. You'll get lowered sperm count, get your sperm frozen. Study done on HRT patients showed this (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1172906), and testosterone therapy was even stopped without PCT.
Running high doses will influence blood pressure, lipid profiles, I don't really need to go into it. Instead of growing a load then going back to nutjuice (which will only get you so far lets be serious) you're far better off in the long run using the minimum needed to grow and the minimum needed to maintain. If your diet and training is spot on this won't be an issue at all, people are just lazy
A young healthy male should be able to recover from a cycle and return to his natural levels rapidly, with or without PCT. Since his natural level will be close to what 250cc a week would yield, it won’t be the ideal level for maintaining any growth beyond normal. Unless you are old like me and need help. But a young guy is better off to let his body return to a natural state if that’s what 250cc a week is designed to do. Vigilant blood work would prove this out per individual. Once an individual is unable to maintain levels that TRT doses would yield, then a cruising and blasting routine may be the way to go, but if your body is capable of returning to normal levels, then that would be the healthiest way to go.
So I tend to agree that 250cc a week is a good TRT dose, I’m not sure that it’s advisable for a young male to jump on that dose when his body is more than capable of sustaining that level of ng/dL naturally.
I do agree that going on a 20 week cycle of heavy AAS, then coming off, then going back on is not real healthy either. It plays havoc psychologically and physiologically. For that reason, I am not a strong proponent of anyone in their 20s to jump into AAS unless they need to in order to compete or make a living. Then I would follow the same routine that a pro body builder does, and never come off, just go down to maybe 500 test per week, along with other gear, then blast up for the event.
As far as sperm count goes and other sides, that’s a risk we all take. Most are manageable risks. We have to address each one and determine if we are willing to take that risk with risk mitigation protocols.
I think the older you are, the more sense it makes to stay on AAS year-round. So your example is spot on for anyone who can’t produce maybe 600ng/dL a week naturally.
But again, test is only part of the equation. I was able to keep muscle and bulk when my test levels were <300. Just a lot more heavy work and a lot closer attention paid to diet.
Interesting about the doses you're taking and the blood levels you're getting
HRT dose is 250mg every 14 days in Australia and will get you blood levels in the upper normal range. My friend is transgender and this puts him at 900-1200 13 days post injection. Are you using UGL or pharmacy products?
When are your friends getting their blood drawn? If it's on day 13 and they have levels between 900 and 1200 then something isn't right. Just knowing how esters work and cleave off, the maximum levels will be 5 days post injection. On day 7 (assuming cypionate) the levels will have dropped considerably. On day 14, there will be barely a trace of test in their system. Injecting 250 every two weeks will provide a very unstable serum testosterone level. And that's the problem with long esters, and I consider enanthate and cypionate to be long esters. The cleavage is way to precarious and unpredictable. Whereas a shorter ester, like prop or hex, will be much more stable and available. Injecting 75mgs of prop every other day is way more effective than 250mgs of cyp every two weeks.
I don't know why it would be any different there as opposed to here, but it's well known that if any doc tries to tell you to inject every 2 weeks, you run away. That is a protocol from another era and one you may find here with an inexperienced doctor. Let's just take your example at face value and assume that it is true heshe runs the top of the range 13 days out. That means they are running WAY above any normal limit for almost the entire time between injections. Stop for a minute and think about that and what TRT is supposed to do (hint: keep you within normal limits) and it is easy to see why that is wrong and bad. Not to mention what it must be doing for e2, BP, hematocrit levels along the way.
Also kisaj, again that's a ****load of assumptions and the doctor is a close family member so I have the utmost faith in the doctors ability to keep my friend healthy and give an adequate HRT protocol
I have assumed nothing and only posted what is fairly obvious. Rather than take it personal, just take a step back and try to understand what is being said. Unless you run lab ranges that are completely different and 900-1200 is near the bottom of the range for Australia, then there is no debate. They are running well above normal range almost all the time.
Also, who cares who the doctor is? 2 weeks simply is a hormonal rollercoaster and not a good protocol. Look around here and see why so many people move to an e3.5d type schedule.
The doctor is an endo, not just some family gp
No idea what other friends you're talking about
250mg a fortnight is a standard HRT protocol in Australia to get levels into the 700-900 range
http://roidcalc.powerbody.ru/ this site is good, I don't like using them but it demonstrates it nicely
Half life of enanthate is 10.5 days. So in 10.5 days no injections, you will have half the amount as you did day 1
You'll be able to see that even in the worst case part, 13 days post injection you will have 12mg in the blood, this takes into account molecular weight of the ester too. This is 84mg a week going by worst case which is plenty for health, most guys will produce less than this and this is just the last day. It averages at 18mg a day or around 125mg a week.
250mg a week will be even better, as long as you're getting good quality- I suspect most people are getting bunk which is why these myths come about but this is just conjecture.
"The material you read on half lives were probably referring to exponential decay, such as is usual with radioactive materials and true, it follows that fixed rate pattern; however, in your case, you have a pharmaceutical non exponential decay and YES, it is dependent on the original quantity you began with as well as how much is left. It is very conceivable and probable that each phase of the substances' half- life shortens as it continues to be eliminated or lose effectiveness. Other factors such as accumulation in the body, metabolism etc., influences the rate, as well.To sum it up, you are correct..."
At the half life, you have half (in vitro) the amount. Your next half life is 25% of the first. The next is 5% of the first. So after 10 days, you are pretty much at the end of your dose. If 10 days represents the half, then at maybe 13 days, it's over. If you inject 250mgs do you really believe that you will get an even distribution of molecules released into the blood stream over 14 days? Impossible. You will get the most within the first five days. After that the levels start falling off. After 10 days it's usually at the bottom of the chart, near zero.