Phera-Plex mixed with original ErgoMax LMG?

hushdrops

New member
Awards
0
If one is on a budget and already has a few bottles of ErgoMax LMG (bought before Phera-Plex was released, so now $$$ is already tied up in ErgoMax LMG where Phera-Plex is the actual more desired supplement now that it has been released), would it be alright to "mix" ErgoMax LMG with Phera-Plex in order to maximize the "time length" of a bottle Phera-Plex?

For example taking Phera-Plex once per day and a ErgoMax capsule in place of a second Phera-Plex capsule? Since they are similar could they be mixed and end up like a normal ErgoMax cycle but with the benefit of more 2-ene?

Also, how about if one wanted to take 30 MG of Phera-Plex per day but instead took two Phera-Plex capsules and one ErgoMax LMG (or e....MAX LMG) instead of three Phera-Plex capsules?

If money was not object I know the best thing to do would be to simply take 3 Phera-Plex capsules per day but in order to use the ErgoMax that's already been purchased before the Phera-Plex was released and still benefit from the Phera-Plex "androgenic" (i.e. more powerful in a different way) effects could this work?

Thanks!
 
Apowerz6

Apowerz6

Board Sponsor
Awards
1
  • Established
For the Androgenic sides you can possibly get from ergo id say take one of each. But you have to see how the sides are. The effect will come, but you just have to weigh the sides.
 
Magickk

Magickk

Board Supporter
Awards
1
  • Established
Just sell the MAX LMG and buy another bottle of Phera-Plex???
 
milwood

milwood

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
that'd be mixing pretty strong methyls...
 
Apowerz6

Apowerz6

Board Sponsor
Awards
1
  • Established
its not really a mix per se, Phera is just a stronger cleaner version its to the 2ene, and ergo is a mixture if 2 and the 3ene If i am not mistaken, so its methyl status is the same is it not?
 
Pioneer

Pioneer

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
plus you wouldn't be "stacking" just switching, no?
 

Moyer

board observer
Awards
1
  • Established
that'd be mixing pretty strong methyls...
Does it really matter as long as the dosage of each is small? Like 10mg EMax + 10mg Pheraplex? Or maybe even 10mg Pheraplex + 10mg SD?
 
UHCougar05

UHCougar05

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Does it really matter as long as the dosage of each is small? Like 10mg EMax + 10mg Pheraplex? Or maybe even 10mg Pheraplex + 10mg SD?
There's really no telling when you mix methyls because we really don't know if 1+1=2 for hepatoxicity or if 1+1=5. You could do it, but most wouldn't recommended it. If you do decide to mix methyls be sure to take all the proper precautions, better safe than sorry.:thumbsup:
 
milwood

milwood

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
There's really no telling when you mix methyls because we really don't know if 1+1=2 for hepatoxicity or if 1+1=5. You could do it, but most wouldn't recommended it. If you do decide to mix methyls be sure to take all the proper precautions, better safe than sorry.:thumbsup:
This is as how I have always understood it. If there is truth to the idea that because of similar structures, PP and ergo could effectively be used simultaneously WITHOUT increasing potential health issues, I, for one, would be very interested. I have always thought that a combo of any 2 methyls is an added risk.
 
UHCougar05

UHCougar05

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
This is as how I have always understood it. If there is truth to the idea that because of similar structures, PP and ergo could effectively be used simultaneously WITHOUT increasing potential health issues, I, for one, would be very interested. I have always thought that a combo of any 2 methyls is an added risk.
I guess they could be stacked but if they're both a 2-ene structure, it might be more feasible to take one or the other. If you know how you react to either PP or Ergo, you might just take 20mg of one instead of 10mg of each. Of course, they may have nuances of their own that may be positives by taking each, but from what's been said, it would appear as if PP is a cleaner version of Ergo and one may benefit just from taking one or the other. This is just what I've gathered from reading some of the logs here. Of course, I'm probably going to pick up one of each once IslandSupps has it back in stock (PP I mean).
 
poopypants

poopypants

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
as it has been stated on here when it comes to methyls 1+1=5 regardless of how similar these two are.

even with their similarities they are still 2 different chems and might have an undesirable side effect. PP by itself has been knwon recently as a very strong andro with almost no androgenic sides to match, while the ergo has had many a user that has contracted oily skin, acne and a few cases of gyno. whos to say that by mixing the two you wont just amplify these negative sides, its not jsut the liver toxicity that you have to worry about.

i personally wouldnt want to spoil my perfectly good PP cycle with some Emax. instead id rather run the 2 seperate and see what i liked better.
 
Grunt76

Grunt76

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
I'd start with the Emax then go Pheraplex for a great finish.
 

hushdrops

New member
Awards
0
I wasn't really thinking about "stacking" the two methyls (Phera & Ergo) but rather substituting some of the Phera-Plex doses with ErgoMax in order to get lengthier cycles out of the limited amount of Phera-Plex that I have on hand versus ErgoMax.

I didn't think there would be any increased hepa-toxicity in taking for example a total of 10 MG Phera (1 cap) and 10 MG of ErgoMax (1 cap) on say every other day in order to make the Phera last for longer amount of time (versus taking two Phera every single day which would only provide half the time allowed to run a cycle).

Another way of putting it would be to take Phera for it's supposedly stronger (more androgenic) proprieties 1/2 of the time and ErgoMax for the other half without changing the amount of active ingredient at all (not changing the amount of capsules taken per day if I were to do a Phera only cycle or Ergo only cycle).

If I had knew that Phera-Plex was going to be released way back when I initially purchased quite a few bottles of ErgoMax (back in Feb. during the original release of ErgoMax when it was thought that the limited release wouldn't even ever appear again, I like many others picked up a few bottles of ErgoMax at that time).

If I had unlimited funds I'd just buy more Phera & possibly try only all Phera cycles and not use the ErgoMax if the Phera is indeed stronger or better than the original ErgoMax.

Ideally I'd do one full cycle of 4 weeks of 20 MG (2 capsules daily) of Phera (along with the needed pre , post ancillaries etc.) -and if I really liked the Phera cycle, I wouldn't even try Ergo (too bad we can only take "so much" of methyl's)....

Thanks for chiming in everyone and I think I will go with taking 10 mg of Phera and 10 mg of ErgoMax on most days in order to be able to get "more cycles" out of the limited Phera that I have on hand and all of the previously purchased ErgoMax. It seems that just that I do NOT stack or exceed 20MG of either / or Phera / ErgoMax per day "toxicity" shouldn't be an issue. I'll be taking the chance I guess though of the cycle not being as "strong" as Phera only if indeed Phera (2-ene) is stronger "to me" BUT the trade off is that I will be able to do a Second Phera / Ergo cycle.

Now that Phera is on sale for only $24 at many places, I'll order a couple of more bottles, just finish out this cycle with all Phera -cause so far I LIKE it (of course I have had about 30% total EMax -hope the Phera alone is just as good -remember, I never stacked or doubled up, just took one in place of the other for a 10 MG dose <out of 20 MG daily maximum<). Guess the original ErgoMax bottles, I'll try that alone after this Phera & have the new inexpesnive Phera's ready over the next couple of years. :)
 
Dungeon1

Dungeon1

Member
Awards
0
I would like to hear what Dr. D has to say about this, but my understanding would be that if the active anabolic component in both is the 5a 2-ene, then the combination could not be more toxic than one by itself. In fact, if the only additive is the 3-ene then the combination of PP and Emax should be LESS toxic than the emax itself, but if the 2-ene is the more toxic of the 2 then the inverse would be true. The bottom line is that these are NOT to DIFFERENT methyls the are different degrees on the SAME methyl.
 
poopypants

poopypants

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
I would like to hear what Dr. D has to say about this, but my understanding would be that if the active anabolic component in both is the 5a 2-ene, then the combination could not be more toxic than one by itself. In fact, if the only additive is the 3-ene then the combination of PP and Emax should be LESS toxic than the emax itself, but if the 2-ene is the more toxic of the 2 then the inverse would be true. The bottom line is that these are NOT to DIFFERENT methyls the are different degrees on the SAME methyl.
NO they are different degrees of the same isomer the methylation of both these coumpounds are not the same.
everyone talks about Emax and Phera plex likeone is just a newer version of the other, but they are different.
they have simlar although different effects, one is much more prone to sides, and no one knows how toxic either of these compounds are. at least i havent seen any blood tests whatsoever on either.

and i guess you werent listen man. when it comes to 2 different methyls and taking them together you might add the dosage like this 10mg+10mg=20mg but that does not mean that the sides and toxicity add the same, and more often then not they are more harmfull together then the same dosage of just one or the other.

its all up to you bro but i want to know why youd short change your phera plex cycle and potentially make worse any sides you could get from an Emax cycle.

It seems that just that I do NOT stack or exceed 20MG of either / or Phera / ErgoMax per day "toxicity" shouldn't be an issue.
thats exactly oppisite of what everyone has been telling you man.


dont do it. its just not smart buddy.
 
Dungeon1

Dungeon1

Member
Awards
0
care to post the chemical structures of both compounds juxtapositionallyand point out the differences? I ask because I have continually heard them referred to as the SAME isomer with the exception of the added 3-ene in the emax. I stated that I would like to hear what Dr. D has to say as I am no chemist, but I believe that they are both compounds that contain the same active, methylated at the same point, in which case I hold to my earlier point. I know that conventional wisdom on methyls is that stacking 2 is a bad idea, but this is not M1T and MDien. These are 2 products containing the SAME active ingredient:
PP: 17a-Methyl-etioallocholan-2-ene-17b-ol
Emax: 17-methyl-delta-2-etioallocholane).
Both methylated 2-ene. The only difference is the 3-ene. I hold firm.
 
poopypants

poopypants

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
care to post the chemical structures of both compounds juxtapositionallyand point out the differences? I ask because I have continually heard them referred to as the SAME isomer with the exception of the added 3-ene in the emax. I stated that I would like to hear what Dr. D has to say as I am no chemist, but I believe that they are both compounds that contain the same active, methylated at the same point, in which case I hold to my earlier point. I know that conventional wisdom on methyls is that stacking 2 is a bad idea, but this is not M1T and MDien. These are 2 products containing the SAME active ingredient:
PP: 17a-Methyl-etioallocholan-2-ene-17b-ol
Emax: 17-methyl-delta-2-etioallocholane).
Both methylated 2-ene. The only difference is the 3-ene. I hold firm.
eh... er.... ok.

etioallocholane is another name for andro, its in nearly every current ph made right now.
prostanozol:[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] [3,2-c]pyrazole-5alpha-etioallocholane-17beta tetrahydropyranol
[/FONT]Rebound-XT:[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] 3,17-Dioxoetioallocholan-1,4,6-triene
and this has the word ene is it is it the same thing too?
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]halodrol: [/FONT]4-chlorodehydromethylandrost-4-ene-3,17b-diol

do you really know what your talking about? now i cant say i can interpret all of these either so why dont you quit acting like you know what your talking about and so will i.
 
prolangtum

prolangtum

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
where do you guys get this 1+1=5 nonsense? taking 20mg e max, or 20mg pp is no better on your liver than 10mg pp and 10mg e max. They dont combine and become super toxic. I thought this forum was above "brotelligence"
 
UHCougar05

UHCougar05

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
where do you guys get this 1+1=5 nonsense? taking 20mg e max, or 20mg pp is no better on your liver than 10mg pp and 10mg e max. They dont combine and become super toxic. I thought this forum was above "brotelligence"
Sorry Pro, that was my fault. I was just speculating about it, but I really don't know all that much about the structures and the biochem behind it (I made a D in Organic Chem I and quit). I guess I subscribe to the better safe than sorry approach and would rather not stack methyls given the choice and with the understanding that the chemical structures of each aren't all that different (2-ene vs. 2-ene and 3-ene). I was just working under the suggestion of not stacking methyls. Maybe you could shed some light on this for me, any time I can learn something new is a good day for me. Thanks for the input Pro. :)
 
milwood

milwood

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
where do you guys get this 1+1=5 nonsense? taking 20mg e max, or 20mg pp is no better on your liver than 10mg pp and 10mg e max. They dont combine and become super toxic. I thought this forum was above "brotelligence"
I assumed this was true for a long time, but I am aware now that (although the equation may not be 1+1=5), the potential danger(s) of combining methylated orals cannot simply be assumed to be 1+1=2; that is--that if they are inherently different (and I don't know what the specifics are in the case of PP and ergo; that's part of the discussion in this thread), they may be more toxic together. For example, if someone took 40mg of M4OHN/day, his liver would be much happier at cycle's end than if he took 20mg of M4OHN and 20mg of M1T daily, say. I've heard other reasons as well, but this example is probably the easiest to illustrate.
 

size

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Combining methyls is not the big issue. Most individuals could take 5mg of oxandrolone, 5mg of dianabol, and 5mg of winstrol w/o hepatotoxicity being an issue. The problem occurs when one is ingesting "useful" dosages of oral agent/s at one time. For instance, 150mg of anadrol and 100mg of wisntrol daily. One can ingest a fair amount of "toxins" and the body can process them, but as one continues to add more "toxins" it becomes a more stressful scenario on the body.

I think it is really important to stress that each individual is different. Consequently, having a comprehensive blood panel is a wise decision as it allows one to have more insight into how one's body is functioning.
 
Dungeon1

Dungeon1

Member
Awards
0
I don't claim to be a chemist, but from what I understand the anabolically active compound in the 2 products in question are the SAME. I am aware that etioallocholane is another way to write andro without the andro. There are MANY ways to write the chemical structure of a compound. I still would like someone to clarify whether or not PP and Ergo have the same active. Thank you Size for chiming in.
 
Dungeon1

Dungeon1

Member
Awards
0
eh... er.... ok.

etioallocholane is another name for andro, its in nearly every current ph made right now.
prostanozol:[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] [3,2-c]pyrazole-5alpha-etioallocholane-17beta tetrahydropyranol
[/FONT]Rebound-XT:[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] 3,17-Dioxoetioallocholan-1,4,6-triene
and this has the word ene is it is it the same thing too?
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]halodrol: [/FONT]4-chlorodehydromethylandrost-4-ene-3,17b-diol

The fact that all of these compounds contain etioallocholane is only relevant to the point you are trying to make if you disregard the rest of the structure. That is tantamount to saying that Ellen is the same as Elvis because they both have EL in them. You can't put structures together piece-meal and create a relationship. The 2 structures I posted, while written differently allude to the same compound with a methylation at the 17C position. The compounds you posted above are far removed from one another.
 

size

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
I still would like someone to clarify whether or not PP and Ergo have the same active.
To my knowldge they are very similar. PP is only the 5alpha where as ergomax is, I believe, a 7:2 of 5alpha:5beta. Expectations are that the 5alpha is stronger than the beta hence PP is stronger.
 
Dungeon1

Dungeon1

Member
Awards
0
I may be wrong, but I thought that Ergomax was 7:2 5a 2-ene: 5a 3-ene and PP was all 5a 2-ene. Though I have often wondered after the "final run" of the Emax if it was not a mix of 5a/5b like the SNS was proposed to be by AX. Pure speculation, I am NOT making any claims about a product sold by anyone.
 

size

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
I may be wrong, but I thought that Ergomax was 7:2 5a 2-ene: 5a 3-ene and PP was all 5a 2-ene. Though I have often wondered after the "final run" of the Emax if it was not a mix of 5a/5b like the SNS was proposed to be by AX. Pure speculation, I am NOT making any claims about a product sold by anyone.
I can't comment with 100% certainty as I have never had a lab assay performed on any of the above. If you ratio is correct, then they are still quite similar.
 
DR.D

DR.D

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
... I ask because I have continually heard them referred to as the SAME isomer with the exception of the added 3-ene in the emax. I stated that I would like to hear what Dr. D has to say as I am no chemist, but I believe that they are both compounds that contain the same active, methylated at the same point, in which case I hold to my earlier point ...
You are basically correct my friend. It's fine to stack them. Taking PP with Emax is like increasing the amount of an isomer present in that formula already. The advantage in the PP is it's greater anabolism and reduced androgenicity. For that reason, I'd start the cycle with Emax and finish with the same dose of the PP. Or just keep it simple and take 10mg of each.
 
milwood

milwood

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
You are basically correct my friend. It's fine to stack them. Taking PP with Emax is like increasing the amount of an isomer present in that formula already. The advantage in the PP is it's greater anabolism and reduced androgenicity. For that reason, I'd start the cycle with Emax and finish with the same dose of the PP. Or just keep it simple and take 10mg of each.
that's good to hear; so as I read it, if the isomers are similar/same, they are comparable and could be used in this fashion?

I don't believe that this negates the general safety guideline of not combining methyls, however. Am I wrong?

thanks!
 
DR.D

DR.D

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
It still follows the good guidelines so safety is not compromised in this case of combining methyls. This is a special case. Other tried and true methyls can be stacked at appropriate doses (like SIZE said earlier) but other than that and this case, it usually requires caution or avoidance.
 
Apowerz6

Apowerz6

Board Sponsor
Awards
1
  • Established
ok milwood they are for the most part the same in chemical structure and methlated in the same way. Emax only differs in the 3ene position, so that makes them just fine to stack, with no real worries of the methylation. Dr. D thanks for that advice doin 30mgs and its KICK ASS on recomp, you guys will see the benefits come the first of DEC !!!
 
poopypants

poopypants

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
You are basically correct my friend. It's fine to stack them. Taking PP with Emax is like increasing the amount of an isomer present in that formula already. The advantage in the PP is it's greater anabolism and reduced androgenicity. For that reason, I'd start the cycle with Emax and finish with the same dose of the PP. Or just keep it simple and take 10mg of each.
This is amazingly good news. thanks for the info im sure it will benifit not only the thread starter but others looking to use up their old Emax as well.

sorry if i seemed to snap back @ ya there Dungeon1 i just didnt want someone finding this thread to have any misunderstanding of the info discussed and end up harming themselves. thanks again to DR D for clearing this up for us.:thumbsup:
 
prolangtum

prolangtum

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
Sorry Pro, that was my fault.
no need to apologize to me...........

I think this was my third consecutive night w/o refilling my lexapro....I become quite bitchy.:rant: I should apologize for being an ass. Anyways...glad that this is all sort of "cleared" up.
 
prolangtum

prolangtum

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
quick side note....im using 20mgs a day of pp with 20mgs of e max, and im doing fine. I havent died yet:cheers: Im doing it for sort of the same reasons the original poster did/is. I have 3 bottles of e max, and 1/4 a bottle of pp left. Trying to make the PP go farther. I notice more libido and roughly equal gains when using the 20/20 vs 40-50mg of PP (i like high doses)
 
UHCougar05

UHCougar05

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
quick side note....im using 20mgs a day of pp with 20mgs of e max, and im doing fine. I havent died yet:cheers: Im doing it for sort of the same reasons the original poster did/is. I have 3 bottles of e max, and 1/4 a bottle of pp left. Trying to make the PP go farther. I notice more libido and roughly equal gains when using the 20/20 vs 40-50mg of PP (i like high doses)
Very cool, thanks for the heads up on that. I might try that combo as well at a later date:thumbsup:
 
Dungeon1

Dungeon1

Member
Awards
0
This is amazingly good news. thanks for the info im sure it will benifit not only the thread starter but others looking to use up their old Emax as well.

sorry if i seemed to snap back @ ya there Dungeon1 i just didnt want someone finding this thread to have any misunderstanding of the info discussed and end up harming themselves. thanks again to DR D for clearing this up for us.:thumbsup:
No problem whatsoever my man. I respect your willingness to stand up for your beliefs and your drive to keep those who are interested safe.
 

delta314

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
The statement below was taken from Designer Supplements and Anabolic Extreme.

While both 2-ene™ and 3-ene are as equally unfriendly to the
liver, milligram for milligram, 2-ene™ is also roughly twice as anabolic, therefore efficiency favours 2-ene™. In a nutshell,
there is little need to include 3-ene in your cycle or stack, when 2-ene™ is the compound causing the Page 1 significant effects.

Don’t be naive to expect this product to be without side effects. The most common and greatest side effect is oily
skin, and consequence, increased acne.
Gynecomastia or “gyno” is the side effect users are most afraid of when using prohormones or androgens. As stated,
there is a chance of very mild indirect aromatisation with 2-ene™ (from a metabolite, as it cannot aromatise directly
itself), and thus the chances of developing gyno are certainly there, but for the most part this effect is highly unlikely,
unless stacking with other aromatising compounds that may increase the potential or using doses above what has
been recommended.
An effect present with all 17aa compounds is the usual unfriendly acquaintance with the liver. The negative side affects
ranges from increased “bad” cholesterol formation (low density lipoprotein – “LDL”), reduced “good” cholesterol
formation (high density lipoprotein - “HDL”), distorted liver enzymes and poor blood profiles. For this reason, and for
the fact that 2-ene™ will cause HPTA shutdown despite being a pheromone, we strongly advice that all users cycle
the product.
Suggested Dosing
Fora 200lb bodybuilder, the ideal
starting dose is approximately 20mg per day.
The dose can be adjusted after several days of use if the effects are too strong (and thus reduced) or the user wishes
to try higher doses. For the most part, it is generally considered that no one user will have to exceed a dose of 30mg
per day, with doses split as evenly as is practical throughout the day.

While “on”…
During your cycle, with methylated compounds, liver protection should be paramount. Anabolic Xtreme Perfect Cycle
is a very good idea for this, despite the claims that use “on-cycle” may affect absorption. Red yeast rice has also
recently became quite a popular addition to cycle ancillaries, due it’s small lovastatin content – an agent that helps
lower LDL levels (“bad” cholesterol).

Prohormone and androgen use that affects the liver negatively also tends to increase free radicals within the body.
Good contenders to combat this are Glucophase XR™, which, as well as being a very potent nutrient partitioner, also
happens to be a very strong anti-oxidant due to it’s k-r-alpha lipoic acid content; and NAC (N-acetylcysteine) which
is also very effective at achieving this.
Of course the Anabolic Xtreme liver protecting product Perfect Cycle™ caters for milk thistle, NAC and r-alpha lipoic
acid in one easy to take capsule.
It is also a very sensible idea to always have an anti-estrogenic compound on hand. The popular SERM (selective
estrogen receptor modulator) tamoxifen citrate (“Nolvadex”) is usually the drug most will suggest, however this is
a prescription drug, therefore obtaining any quantity of it is a grey-area indeed. There are available supplementary
compounds that can block the process of testosterone-to-estrogen conversion (called “aromatisation”) that can be
substituted for Nolvadex if obtaining an Rx drug is not within your ethical stance. In fact, many consider the aromatase-
inhibiting product Rebound XT™ to be superior to Nolvadex for prevention of gyno and ensuring that estrogenbloat
is minimal.
When “off”…
Upon cessation of your prohormone, androgen or stack should follow several weeks of what is commonly referred to
as “PCT” – post-cycle therapy (or treatment). This period of time usually reflects the length of time you spent “on” the
cycle and is when you attempt to re-establish your own natural testosterone production which has been reduced due
to the intake of the prohormone or androgen. This period of time should be more than simply taking a product to aid
you. It should be a well regimented practice including avoiding ultra-high volume training, avoiding training beyond
failure, ensuring calories and carbs stay high, increasing zinc intake and avoiding drugs such as alcohol that have
detrimental effects on the objective we are aiming to achieve.
The first port of call is to have a tool that will control estrogen while boosting your own testosterone production to
ensure you retain as many of your on-cycle gains as possible. This is where a product such as Rebound XT™ really
excels.
When testosterone levels are low, levels of cortisol tend to be high, which is incredibly detrimental to the objective
of retaining muscle tissue. A product such as Lean Xtreme™ can prove to be invaluable in this respect as it helps
antagonize the catabolic effects as well as reduce cortisol within the body, and is not just constrained in the liver like
other cortisol blockers available.
Liver protection during this period is also still of concern, so continuation of the intake of milk thistle and red yeast rice
is still recommended, as is a good anti-oxidant like Glucophase XR™. Fenugreek has also recently become popular
for recovering testicle volume and size.
 
yeahright

yeahright

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Any real-world feedback from people who took Dr. D's advice and did the 10mg emax, 10mg Phera-Plex split each day?
 
Syr

Syr

Hot Italian Goldmember
Awards
1
  • Established
A friend of mine took 10mg Ergomax and 10mg of a clone of PP (not sure of the ratio there) with excellent results and no side effects.

The idea of starting with Ergo and finishing with PP (with maybe a week of the 10+10 stack) would be even better.
 
milwood

milwood

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
curious to see what people find in terms of HOW to combine these; PP for 3 weeks then Ergo for 3 Or Ergo first, PP later. Or, 10mg of PP in the AM, 10mg of Ergo in the PM. Or vice versa.

Sorta like the SD or Ergo first discussion.
 

c-los 21

Anabolic Xtreme Rep
Awards
1
  • Established
curious to see what people find in terms of HOW to combine these; PP for 3 weeks then Ergo for 3 Or Ergo first, PP later. Or, 10mg of PP in the AM, 10mg of Ergo in the PM. Or vice versa.

Sorta like the SD or Ergo first discussion.
Dr.D has a good point and although I do not advocate the use of these two compounds in conjunction, I would say that you will benefit mosty(sides/gain ratio) with a maximum of 30mg of one compounds at any given time. Place EMax at the beginning of the cycle as it is the weaker of the two. With SD and ergomax there is a final conclusion to this....place SD last. SD is mush more anabolic and will produce clean/drier LBM gains and the side effects are more potent.

I would try this cycle of PP and Ergo

First timer:
EMAX 10/10/20/20
PP 10/10/20/20

More advanced:
ErgoMax LMG 10/20/20/20
Phera-Plex 10/20/20/30
 
DR.D

DR.D

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
I agree with Syr and C-los, do PP in the last half of the cycle. If they are combined concurrently, Emax morning and PP as the second dose later in the day ideally.
 

c-los 21

Anabolic Xtreme Rep
Awards
1
  • Established
I agree with Syr and C-los, do PP in the last half of the cycle. If they are combined concurrently, Emax morning and PP as the second dose later in the day ideally.
Thanks, great to see you over here. :)
 
supersize77

supersize77

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
I agree with Syr and C-los, do PP in the last half of the cycle. If they are combined concurrently, Emax morning and PP as the second dose later in the day ideally.
Why in this particular order when run concurrently? Would it really make a substantial differnce?
 
machinehead

machinehead

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Why in this particular order when run concurrently? Would it really make a substantial differnce?
I did it like that and my reasonong was the more androgenic during the day, the more anabolic at night. It makes no difference, I believe. I guess most of us here like overanalyzing....
 
machinehead

machinehead

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Place EMax at the beginning of the cycle as it is the weaker of the two. With SD and ergomax there is a final conclusion to this....place SD last. SD is mush more anabolic and will produce clean/drier LBM gains and the side effects are more potent.
Well, this is just a conclusion, not necessarily final. I know you are doing your job [and refer to the writeups] but you can't really predict how certain individuals would respond to the said compounds, hence the irrelevance of the terms "weaker," "more anabolic," and "clean/drier LBM gains." In my experience, SD is very androgenic and the sides are harsh and more visible. I gained all the weight in the first week of use. Emax takes longer to kick in, but it is not weaker, it produces better and cleaner mass gains with time. PP is similar, although it permits using higher dose. It is generally a good idea to start with a stronger androgen [SD] and finish off with a stronger anabolic [PP]. Emax is somewhere in between; the original green bottle Ergomax is a level above the rest. I don't know what's in it, but neither Emax nor PP feel anything like it.


It's funny how Dr.D says he agrees with you but at the same time recommends using PP at the end.

Back to the question, I would say start with Ergo and then either finish with PP or add 10 to 20 mg for the last couple of weeks.


Oh, one last thing..I will never ever again touch SD but this is the subject of a different thread.
 

c-los 21

Anabolic Xtreme Rep
Awards
1
  • Established
Well, this is just a conclusion, not necessarily final. I know you are doing your job [and refer to the writeups] but you can't really predict how certain individuals would respond to the said compounds, hence the irrelevance of the terms "weaker," "more anabolic," and "clean/drier LBM gains."
I was/am NOT predicting anything.

I was stating the facts of what is proven, on paper, about the products.
Gather the facts, don't base the conclusion from your experience only.
 
DR.D

DR.D

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Why in this particular order when run concurrently? Would it really make a substantial differnce?
It probably doesn't matter too much in real life, but I'd use the more androgenic compound earlier in the day just to help delay suppression for as long as possible.

Machinehead feels that SD is more androgenic than PP, I just didn't experience that. Except for aggression, SD felt extremely clean to me. It is the best I've ever used as far as acne goes, not even 1 zit. PP was clean on mood but much tougher on my skin. PP was also more suppressive with more bloat too suggestive of higher androgeny. It is clearly far more androgenic on paper.
 

Similar threads


Top