*The Pulsing Method Is INEFFECTIVE and DANGEROUS: The TRUTH EXPOSED!*
- 04-12-2007, 01:01 AM
- 04-12-2007, 01:39 AM
- 04-12-2007, 02:24 AM
04-12-2007, 12:17 PM
I wanted to express my opinion on the whole "to pulse or not to pulse" discussion, to see if people are in agreeance with me.
First, I think it's very important to get one thing clear here with regards to pulsing. If you are a bodybuilder who's striving to add X number of lbs of LBM to your frame per year, to better yourself for competition, then the pulse method is not for you.
As far as I'm concerned, pulsing is a method better suited for an avid weight lifter, who also has goals in mind, but is far more flexable with regards to his weight training agenda. Some one who is looking to make gains slightly faster than those who are drug free, but is willing to accept a 5 lb. gain and still see that as a successful venture. Unlike a competitive bodybuilder who is looking more to maximize the possible gains yielded forth by a cycle, and with that, is using a cycle with far greater dosages and lengths of time.
Pulsing also appears to be better suited for someone who isn't looking to sacrifice his/her health for the sport. Some people training out there don't care about a drug's impact on their system. They want to grow and thats all their concerned with. For those individuals, they would be better suited with a cycling method that will produce results that meet their expectations. The pulse method isn't the answer for those individuals.
So needless to say, the "real world" feedback, thus so far, appears to be real positive. Some more cycles run in the pulse method, coupled with some posted healthy pre/post blood work, will only help to reinforce the positiveness. Also, I think once some people out there decide what it is that they want to achieve through this sport, and take into consideration what is truly realistic for them self (as far as what they could actually achieve for strength and muscle gain), more and more individuals may begin to see the benefit to pulsing versus other typical cycling methods.
In all honesty, if you're not going to be standing on stage or under a bar at a meet, then why go balls to the wall with your doses and cycle lengths?!?! Think about it!
04-12-2007, 04:44 PM
I agree with your closing note; it's poor risk management to be planning/running any steroids cycles without any clear-cut motives or benefits from doing so. However, I think you're missing the point of pulsing: to avoid post-cycle therapy.
To say that it's not for the competative bodybuilder/powerlifter/athlete is a strong statement to be making, and at the moment there's not enough data to say that one method (cycling or pulsing) is superior over the other. Although pulsing will not be as yield as high of gains as a straight cycle, the cycle can also be run a little longer than usual, and the real kicker: NO PCT! For someone who cannot access the means of proper PCT, or someone who has poor success with proper PCT, this sounds like a great alternative.
04-12-2007, 04:45 PM
i agree with the rest of your post though and would say most of the reasons you stated are the ones id be looking into pulsing something like Epi / Havoc.
04-12-2007, 04:57 PM
04-12-2007, 05:15 PM
Though I am not a fan of pulsing the original poster's argument has several large holes in it.
Comparison of AAS to corticosteroids is completely invalid IMO. Different pathways, different objectives in using them and huge differences in their impact to, yes once again, very different portions of the endocrine system.
There's some broad statements made about peak blood levels and half lives. This has to be made more specific given the huge array of differences between AAS compounds themselves and the method of administration...ie one can't talk about short half lives of orals and compare them to long acting ester injectibles.
Not really taking a side here as I have no interest in bridging, cruising or pulsing. I tend to agree with Dr John that such things are not good ideas in the first place, however if one is going to make a strongly worded,capitalized and highlighted argument of this nature..one should have their ducks in a row first.
04-12-2007, 05:21 PM
04-12-2007, 05:25 PM
04-12-2007, 08:26 PM
04-12-2007, 11:55 PM
04-13-2007, 10:20 AM
04-13-2007, 11:52 AM
04-15-2007, 02:55 PM
04-15-2007, 03:55 PM
04-19-2007, 06:25 PM
08-09-2011, 10:02 AM
I go ahead and critique both,pulsing isn't new, or just with antibiotics and corts. Went to a few doctors about the idea. Birth control has been a pulse method being used for years with few sides and long term problems. Burn and severe trauma patients have received pulsed anabolics to prevent tissue loss. But one day on one day off or 3days a week m,w,f or even two on and two off over time won't allow enough down time to prevent shutdown(what most people are trying to avoid) none of the doctors would give recommendations on how to pulse but did mention you would want twice as much dime off as on and keep cycles very short kind of a 4 on 8 off or 7 on 14off with a few days of tapering down.
08-09-2011, 11:44 AM
unless you went to doctors who specialize in anabolic/androgenic steroids, those doctors you talked to are most likely just going along with what ever sounds the safest.
most regular doctors have zero knowledge on aas.
i dont know much about birth control, but I do know the girls i slept with that took it, had to take it every day.
basically from what i can tell, as of right now, it is just a difference of opinion, as neither side has any actual data on the benifits or disadvantages of pulsing anabolic androgenic steroids.
but there is alot of data on using steroids in the manner they were ment to be used, as well as in supraphysiological dosages.
i've also never heard of burn victims being given high dosages of anavar every other day. I believe 10-20mg in the med community is the rec dosage for patients everyday.
08-09-2011, 04:04 PM
I thought this thread was locked..... 5 years ago.
08-09-2011, 04:22 PM
08-09-2011, 05:30 PM
weird things happen when you migrate the forums.
What a goofy thread. Oral steroids are dangerous. By association, pulsing is also going to be dangerous.
The OP was banned like the day of. Then he started a supplement company, became a board supporter, made outlandish claims and remarks about the competition, and got banned again. Odd guy to go from troll to legit to troll again.
03-07-2013, 01:52 PM
Granted, I've only read the first post, but this is a very frustrating thread. Please, forgive me if this has already been touched upon. You're comparing apples to oranges by saying "most medications should not be pulsed, so AAS should not be pulsed either". Read a few papers on GnRH and leuprolide. You'll find that leuprolide, a synthetic GnRHr agonist, is fairly versatile in that it can be used both to suppress as well as stimulate hormone production (I do believe that its use to stimulate hormone production is not FDA approved, and is therefore an off-label use. Never-the-less, this is still sometimes done in practice). This is a much better basis of comparison.
Everything I say is fictional and should not be taken seriously.
03-07-2013, 04:50 PM
03-07-2013, 08:17 PM
Similar Forum Threads
- By soontobbeast in forum AnabolicsReplies: 6Last Post: 04-20-2012, 01:24 PM
- By AutoKal47 in forum SupplementsReplies: 40Last Post: 08-11-2011, 12:19 PM
- By TheDiesel85 in forum AnabolicsReplies: 3Last Post: 08-12-2009, 08:52 AM
- By Deggial in forum AnabolicsReplies: 57Last Post: 09-06-2007, 05:58 AM
- By deshawn in forum AnabolicsReplies: 0Last Post: 03-25-2007, 02:53 PM