1,4-andro, 4 weeks to kick in? To me, that's a misconception...

Page 1 of 2 12 Last
  1. New Member
    neurotic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    124
    Rep Power
    203
    Level
    10
    Lv. Percent
    14.34%

    1,4-andro, 4 weeks to kick in? To me, that's a misconception...


    hello,

    I've used the search function several times and I've seen many many posts which state that 1,4-andro needs to be taken at least for 4 weeks in order for it to kick in... I don't see why a fast acting oral would take time to kick in, I could understand that if we are talking about a long acting ester such as Deca or equipoise ... but with an oral? I just don't get it. I'd really like that someone shed light on this and explained the theory behind it...

    Thank you.

  2. Advanced Member
    NO MERCY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    745
    Rep Power
    613
    Level
    21
    Lv. Percent
    40.44%

    I am interested in hearing some feedback on this as well
  3. Senior Member
    MarcusG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    1,223
    Rep Power
    754
    Level
    28
    Lv. Percent
    24.17%
    Achievements Posting Pro

    Probably because EQ is somewhat weaker than test/deca on a standalone roid cycle (I've not done those) and so we can't expect 1,4ad to outperform 4ad or 1-test as a standalone cycle unless you extend the cycle time.
    •   
       

  4. New Member
    shadow_manifest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    183
    Rep Power
    233
    Level
    12
    Lv. Percent
    27.8%

    I think it takes time for it to build up in your system. From my understanding the liver breaks down anything new for about 2 weeks. After 2 weeks it starts to let more and more through from what I've heard and read. So that may be the reason but I am not 100% sure.
  5. New Member
    neurotic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    124
    Rep Power
    203
    Level
    10
    Lv. Percent
    14.34%

    Quote Originally Posted by shadow_manifest
    I think it takes time for it to build up in your system. From my understanding the liver breaks down anything new for about 2 weeks. After 2 weeks it starts to let more and more through from what I've heard and read. So that may be the reason but I am not 100% sure.
    I don't really think that's the reason, for, when using orals, blood hormone levels climb sharply in a matter of hours. So you have high blood hormone levels from the very first day, so I think the idea of 1,4-andro taking weeks to kick in stems from the fact that EQ takes weeks to quick in due to its very long ester.
  6. ItriedtoripoffBobosonowIamgonehaveaniceday
    Guest
    ItriedtoripoffBobosonowIamgonehaveaniceday's Avatar

    I think if you take a good dose of 600-1200 a day with something like 1test it should be a good cycle. It shoud definitle overcome the side of appetite suppression. I might try it really soon.
  7. Advanced Member
    NO MERCY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    745
    Rep Power
    613
    Level
    21
    Lv. Percent
    40.44%

    Quote Originally Posted by MarcusG
    Probably because EQ is somewhat weaker than test/deca on a standalone roid cycle (I've not done those) and so we can't expect 1,4ad to outperform 4ad or 1-test as a standalone cycle unless you extend the cycle time.

    mmmm interesting

    any other feedback anyone?
  8. Advanced Member
    Jeff's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  180 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Age
    44
    Posts
    637
    Rep Power
    462
    Level
    20
    Lv. Percent
    79.13%

    Quote Originally Posted by neurotic
    I don't really think that's the reason, for, when using orals, blood hormone levels climb sharply in a matter of hours. So you have high blood hormone levels from the very first day, so I think the idea of 1,4-andro taking weeks to kick in stems from the fact that EQ takes weeks to quick in due to its very long ester.
    Did i miss something? 1,4-andro does not have an ester.

    it does have everything to do with your liver recognizing it as a foreign substance. Oral testosterone cycles work fast because your liver knows what it is and doesn't go after it, boldenone is NOT a natural human hormone, so your body will take a couple of weeks to adjust to it being there.
  9. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7017

    Quote Originally Posted by neurotic
    I don't really think that's the reason, for, when using orals, blood hormone levels climb sharply in a matter of hours. So you have high blood hormone levels from the very first day, so I think the idea of 1,4-andro taking weeks to kick in stems from the fact that EQ takes weeks to quick in due to its very long ester.

    Well the difference would be bioavailability compared to other orals (methylated). Blood hormone levels do rise rapidly but also dimimsh rapidly unless otherwise methyalted. BUt I tihnk your right in assuming that since EQ takes a while to have any effect, the consensus was that 1,4 andro wouold do the same. I agree that it shouldn't take that much time to have an effect. It should be equivalent to maybe 1AD.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  10. Brewing Anabolic Minds
    Chemo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    2,022
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    29
    Lv. Percent
    27.32%
    Achievements Posting Pro

    IMO, the effects from 1,4 should present within a week or two (aromatization, appetite, etc.) but the 4 week recommendation is to help illicit the generally mild anabolic response.

    Chemo
  11. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7017

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff
    Did i miss something? 1,4-andro does not have an ester.

    it does have everything to do with your liver recognizing it as a foreign substance. Oral testosterone cycles work fast because your liver knows what it is and doesn't go after it, boldenone is NOT a natural human hormone, so your body will take a couple of weeks to adjust to it being there.
    It has nothing to do with it being natural. Oral testosterone is either methyalted or lymphatically absorbed (Andriol) so therfore bioavailabilty is increased.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  12. New Member
    neurotic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    124
    Rep Power
    203
    Level
    10
    Lv. Percent
    14.34%

    If you can do 2-weekers with other oral prohormones, you can also do them with 1,4-andro ... even better, because 1,4-andro has the highest oral bioavailability of all oral prohormones ---> around 40%.
  13. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7017

    You could, but its relatively mild so I'm not sure how much you would gain from it. Its still a far cry from 17 alpha-alkylated orals in terms of bioavailibility so I tihnk the positive effects of such a short cycle would be minimal at best.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  14. New Member
    neurotic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    124
    Rep Power
    203
    Level
    10
    Lv. Percent
    14.34%

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo
    You could, but its relatively mild so I'm not sure how much you would gain from it. Its still a far cry from 17 alpha-alkylated orals in terms of bioavailibility so I tihnk the positive effects of such a short cycle would be minimal at best.
    Oral bioavailability is lower than that of 17AA orals, but you take higher doses in order to make up for that.
    If 2-weekers using test and tren are effective, so will be 2-weekers using high doses of oral 1,4-andro y conjunction with high doses of transdermal 4-diol and cyclo 1-test.
  15. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7017

    Lower? Yeah its more than 50% lower. And comparing Test and tren to 1,4andro isn't exactly wise. ITs apples and oranges. Actually its apples and watermelons. The difference is very drastic.

    I'm not saying you won't see results, but it won't be that much and you have to take a lot of it to see anything. I would rather use something else thats more effective, like more 4AD or 1-Test. Just seems like a waste of money to me, but to each his own.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  16. New Member
    neurotic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    124
    Rep Power
    203
    Level
    10
    Lv. Percent
    14.34%

    Hmm, if you were to compare the Anabolic potency of testosterone to that of boldenone, miligram per miligram, what number would you get?
  17. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7017

    No clue. Boldenone is good, but not as good as Test. Thats just from personal experience. They do stack well together because there anabolic effects are mediated differently but overall nothing is as good as Test in terms of gains.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  18. New Member
    neurotic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    124
    Rep Power
    203
    Level
    10
    Lv. Percent
    14.34%

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo
    but overall nothing is as good as Test in terms of gains.
    I don't think Nandi12 would agree with you ...
    There are steroids with an anabolic potency miligram per miligram bigger than that of test ... tren and 1-test come to my mind.
    Take into account that I'm speaking about SKELETAL MUSCLE GAINS ... if you are talking about muscle + WATER gains then... welll... perhaps nothing is as good as test in that case.
  19. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7017

    The he can disagree. Ask most AAS users what they like the best and the majority of the time its Test. I don't care about mg to mg or whatever Vida ratio you can give me, as far as results, Test is king IMO. Vida's ratios are based on what dosages should be. If we went by ratios all the time then methyltrienolone would be king and its not. Methyltest would be the best oral out there and it sucks. Ratios are a guideline for doisages compared to a standard. Test will always be the best IMO, and thats from experience. I've gained more off of Test than anything and I've done several tren cycles along with Drol, Dbol, 1-test, M1T, Winny, etc...

    1-test better than Test? In your dreams...


    I'm out...I need sleep.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  20. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7017

    Quote Originally Posted by neurotic
    There are steroids with an anabolic potency miligram per miligram bigger than that of test ... tren and 1-test come to my mind.
    .
    Your too hung up on ratios.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  21. New Member
    neurotic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    124
    Rep Power
    203
    Level
    10
    Lv. Percent
    14.34%

    Studies show that, when administered by IM injection, 1-test is 7 times more anabolic than testosterone base and 2 times more anabolic than test propionate.
    If we cannot rely on ratios and/or studies, how do we know which steroids are more anabolic and which are more androgenic? It's what we have: studies and ratios. Other than that... anecdotal reports... but I very much doubt we can conclude anecdotal reports are EVIDENCE, they will never be.
    Then if we cannot trust studies and/or ratios anyone might come up saying "To me, Anavar is more androgenic than test" and no one could antagonize his point of view, don't you think?
  22. Senior Member
    Cuffs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    2,192
    Rep Power
    1232
    Level
    38
    Lv. Percent
    98.04%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    **** Bobo, don't you ever sleep? Insomnia is a bitch, isn't it...LOL.
  23. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7017

    Quote Originally Posted by neurotic
    Studies show that, when administered by IM injection, 1-test is 7 times more anabolic than testosterone base and 2 times more anabolic than test propionate.
    If we cannot rely on ratios and/or studies, how do we know which steroids are more anabolic and which are more androgenic? It's what we have: studies and ratios. Other than that... anecdotal reports... but I very much doubt we can conclude anecdotal reports are EVIDENCE, they will never be.
    Then if we cannot trust studies and/or ratios anyone might come up saying "To me, Anavar is more androgenic than test" and no one could antagonize his point of view, don't you think?
    Your ratios are based on the effect on rat organs, not humans. They don't even show metabolic effects. Its a simple comparison of organ and muscle effcts in rats, thats it. I'll look it up tomorrow but the process of how they determined ratios back in the 60's was used to determine dosages compared to a standard hormone. Thats it.
    The point is, we don't know which ones will be good. You have to look past the ratios and at the actual substance itself. I HAVE taken high doses of 1-test and its not close to Test.

    Actually I found it.


    "To determine the A/A ratio, scientists utilized a test called the Rat Levator Ani Assay. In this test, scientists use two groups of castrated rats. The rats are castrated to remove any interfering influence from fluctuating natural androgen levels. The first group of rats are a control group that receives a placebo, while the second group receives the steroid (either by injection or orally). After a period of time (several days to weeks) the rats are sacrificed. Researchers then isolate three organs from each of the rats the seminal vesicles, ventral prostate, and levator ani muscle. These organs are all weighed and a comparison of the active group to the placebo groups is made. The differences in weights for the seminal vesicles and ventral prostate represent androgenic activity, while the difference in the weight of the levator ani muscles in the control and active group represent anabolic activity.

    To give a landmark against which to gauge the relative activities of each steroid in this assay, a standard is used in some of the rats in the active group. This standard is usually testosterone, testosterone propionate, or 17alpha-methyltestosterone (MT) and the results obtained from the rats given this standard are designated an arbitrary number of 1 for anabolic activity and 1 for androgenic activity. Therefore these standard androgens are said to have an A/A ratio of 1.

    Summary

    Just because something is 1000 times as potent as d-bol does not mean that it will get you 1000 times as big as d-bol at the same dose. No, what it means is that it takes a dose 1/1000th that of a given dose dbol to get the same result. In fact, if you took d-bol like doses of one of those monster steroids in the Ugly section you probably would not get any gains. You would probably just end up sick.


    NOW, I'm going to bed.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  24. New Member
    neurotic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    124
    Rep Power
    203
    Level
    10
    Lv. Percent
    14.34%

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo
    Just because something is 1000 times as potent as d-bol does not mean that it will get you 1000 times as big as d-bol at the same dose. No, what it means is that it takes a dose 1/1000th that of a given dose dbol to get the same result. In fact, if you took d-bol like doses of one of those monster steroids in the Ugly section you probably would not get any gains. You would probably just end up sick.
    That's something I know and it doesn't antagonize what I said... which is that it would take 1/7th the dose you take of test to obtain the same results taking 1-test ... which means that you should obtain the same anabolic effect taking 700 mg of test prop weekly or taking 100 mg of 1-test prop weekly.
  25. Brewing Anabolic Minds
    Chemo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    2,022
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    29
    Lv. Percent
    27.32%
    Achievements Posting Pro

    neurotic,

    What is the point of your discussion on this thread? The principles you are expounding have been mature for years...decades or longer.

    You originally asked about 1,4 and now have taken the topic to something not even in the same ballpark. Is 1-test better than test? You're out of your mind. Does 1-test have its uses? Of course it does. That is the very basis for stacking agents to illicit their unique characteristics.

    So, to refocus this thread into a productive discussion: what is your question or point??

    Chemo
  26. New Member
    neurotic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    124
    Rep Power
    203
    Level
    10
    Lv. Percent
    14.34%

    Quote Originally Posted by Chemo
    Is 1-test better than test? You're out of your mind. Does 1-test have its uses?
    As far as scientific studies go it should be better than test. As far as anecdotal reports... well, I think anecdotal reports aren't EVIDENCE.
    If you want we might ask Pat Arnold to come here and discuss this issue with him, he will know far better than me.

    So, to refocus this thread into a productive discussion: what is your question or point??
    My point is that I just don't understand why people think that 1,4-andro should be taken longer than other orals in order to be effective. If blood hormone levels peak from the very first day, I don't understand why you should take it for 4 weeks. I think it's all about a misconception that stems from the fact that EQ doesn't peak until week 3-4 due to its very long ester; that misconception turned out to become a myth, and people think that they can apply to 1,4-andro the same principle they apply to EQ... but they don't bear in mind that it's nothing to do with each other, for one is a oral and the other is a long lasting injectable ester.
  27. Advanced Member
    maggmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    703
    Rep Power
    495
    Level
    20
    Lv. Percent
    84.24%

    If 1/4 andro is absorbed at a rate of 40% and you take around 1000 mg per day that means you are absorbing around 400 mg per day, that seems like a lot but... when you take intio account that the conversion rate to boldenone is probably somewhere between 10 and 15 % you are only actually getting between 40 and 60 mg of boldenone per day. take high end 60*7=420 mg of boldenone per day in circulation. Boldenone is chiefly an anabolic hormone so it will shift your body into a more anabolic state pretty much immediately BUT the body takes time to adjust to that new higher anabolic state, it takes time to begin partitioning nutrients differentely and growing muscle. The androgenic component of test I believe allows for more immediate strength gains and the anabolic component which is not that much lower allows for a slow controlled growth of muscle. When you lessen the androgenic component as you do in boldenone you cut back on the immediate gains. This is mainly conjecture but a HUGE amount of anectdotal evidence backs it up.
  28. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7017

    Quote Originally Posted by neurotic
    As far as scientific studies go it should be better than test. As far as anecdotal reports... well, I think anecdotal reports aren't EVIDENCE.
    If you want we might ask Pat Arnold to come here and discuss this issue with him, he will know far better than me.


    .
    And Pat would tell you that comparing 1-Test to Test is laughable in terms of real world results.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  29. New Member
    neurotic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    124
    Rep Power
    203
    Level
    10
    Lv. Percent
    14.34%

    The androgenic compound (as you call it) doesn't increase your muscle size, that's why it's called androgenic and not anabolic... it does, however, increase your prostate size, your acne, your hairloss, your agressivity and your strength. but not your skeletal muscle size.
    If 1,4-andro 2-weekers don't work then no 2-weeker should work.
  30. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7017

    Quote Originally Posted by neurotic
    That's something I know and it doesn't antagonize what I said... which is that it would take 1/7th the dose you take of test to obtain the same results taking 1-test ... which means that you should obtain the same anabolic effect taking 700 mg of test prop weekly or taking 100 mg of 1-test prop weekly.
    I don't tihnk you do know. THe results are done on rat prostates and muscle and in no way does that equate to results in the human body. Just because it says you can take 1/7th the dose does not mean you will get the same results as test. You seem to think that the ratio is the only thing to look at. You have to look at the mechanisms by which they are anabolic/androgenic, or more importantly why they are not.

    If we went by rat assays all the time Clenbuterol would be highly anabolic.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  31. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7017

    Quote Originally Posted by neurotic
    The androgenic compound (as you call it) doesn't increase your muscle size, that's why it's called androgenic and not anabolic... it does, however, increase your prostate size, your acne, your hairloss, your agressivity and your strength. but not your skeletal muscle size.
    If 1,4-andro 2-weekers don't work then no 2-weeker should work.
    Nobody said they wouldn't work!!!!! Get that through your head!
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  32. New Member
    Jason161's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    239
    Rep Power
    252
    Level
    13
    Lv. Percent
    55.02%

    As sifu says, This is like kicking a dead horse bobo,
  33. New Member
    neurotic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    124
    Rep Power
    203
    Level
    10
    Lv. Percent
    14.34%

    bobo,

    if ratios and rat assays aren't the only thing to look at and it's better to look at the mechanisms by which something works or something doesn't work. Would you explain the mechanisms by which test works so well and the mechanisms by which 1-test doesn't work so well?
  34. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7017

    Testosterone causes a cascade of effects that can effect growth. The increase in estrgen increases cell volume, IGF-1, GH, nutrient partioning, mRNA gene transcription, increased protein synthesis, etc.....

    1-Test doesn't aromatize. Thats its biggest downfall.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  35. New Member
    comrade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Age
    34
    Posts
    116
    Rep Power
    189
    Level
    11
    Lv. Percent
    72.77%

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo
    The he can disagree. Ask most AAS users what they like the best and the majority of the time its Test. I don't care about mg to mg or whatever Vida ratio you can give me, as far as results, Test is king IMO. Vida's ratios are based on what dosages should be. If we went by ratios all the time then methyltrienolone would be king and its not. Methyltest would be the best oral out there and it sucks. Ratios are a guideline for doisages compared to a standard. Test will always be the best IMO, and thats from experience. I've gained more off of Test than anything and I've done several tren cycles along with Drol, Dbol, 1-test, M1T, Winny, etc...

    1-test better than Test? In your dreams...


    I'm out...I need sleep.
    really, i would have thought maybe dbol (not speaking from experience)

    also, I know that the gains are supposed to be low quality, but i always heard anadrol was there strongest.
  36. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7017

    Dbol, not even close. Anadrol is very good IMO but your also limited in how much you take and for how long. It blows Dbol out of the water IMO but thats me. Its definetly my favorite oral. Everyone seems to react differently to these things though so its highly subjective. I just got done using it and liked it a lot.


    Bottom line, nothing is as good as a high dose of Test.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  37. Advanced Member
    db682's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Age
    36
    Posts
    777
    Rep Power
    527
    Level
    25
    Lv. Percent
    39.83%

    neurotic quote: "which is that it would take 1/7th the dose you take of test to obtain the same results taking 1-test"

    Haaaaaa. thats great! Neurotic you continue believing that and why your lagging behind, the rest of us will be just a bunch of over achievers.

    This thread is useless. Anybody who believes 1-test has 7 times the potency of test needs to open some books or ask around and do a bit of research on this stuff and I dont just mean by the numbers either. I think PA would get a giggle out of this. Bring him over.

    db
  38. Advanced Member
    maggmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    703
    Rep Power
    495
    Level
    20
    Lv. Percent
    84.24%

    The cascade of effects Bobo was talking about is difficult to classify scientifically, it is difficult to say test is better heres why. The anectdotal evidence however proves that no matter what the ratios say test causes greater gains than 1/4 andro or even boldenone in the average subject. If the ratios cannot account for this then we need to question not the validity of the ratios but their usefulness in our particular interest in anabolic compounds.
  39. New Member
    neurotic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    124
    Rep Power
    203
    Level
    10
    Lv. Percent
    14.34%

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo
    1-Test doesn't aromatize. Thats its biggest downfall.
    If I were to take test I would ALWAYS use it along with an aromatase blocker or a SERM , so I suppose that if that which you say is the case I'm better off using 1-test.
  40. Banned
    sifu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    1,395
    Rep Power
    0
    Level
    29
    Lv. Percent
    15.15%
    Achievements Posting Pro

    Test is king, not 1test or methyl-test or M1T. But test is king. Ask any pro or any brother that knows what they are talking about. There is a reason that it is the base for every stack, and if it isn't the base of someones stack, then they are going about it all wrong.
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. The longest test can take to kick in
    By UNDERTAKER in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 07-26-2005, 03:49 PM
  2. About how long does it take for Deca to kick in?
    By GeneTikz in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-15-2005, 05:27 PM
  3. 4AD Cyp - How long to kick in?
    By tlow4u in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-16-2005, 11:38 PM
  4. how long does m5aa take to kick in?
    By d00fy in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-27-2004, 08:26 PM
  5. How long for Methyl1,4Addiol to kick in
    By Kachinsky in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 11-20-2004, 09:34 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Log in
Log in