Long cycles, moderate doses...

ozarkaBRAND

ozarkaBRAND

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
12-16 weeks, 400mg test per week, no oral kickstart... if one were to frontload this, how much test per week and for how long should it be frontloaded?

I'm sure shutdown would be somewhat significant during a cycle like this, would hcg be necessary? If so, any recommendations that have worked for you guys? Also, when people say that they are running something like test E for 12 weeks, do they count the last 2 weeks of waiting for the ester to clear as a part of that 12 weeks?

Lastly (for now), what's a sufficient pct length for a cycle this long, 4 weeks, 6 weeks??
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
12-16 weeks, 400mg test per week, no oral kickstart... if one were to frontload this, how much test per week and for how long should it be frontloaded?
Front-loading isn't necessary. Google "Roid Calculator" and use this resource to calculate clearance half-lives, and you see that front-loading does nothing but produce hormone fluctuations.

I'm sure shutdown would be somewhat significant during a cycle like this, would hcg be necessary? Also, when people say that they are running something like test E for 12 weeks, do they count the last 2 weeks of waiting for the ester to clear as a part of that 12 weeks?
I would personally use it for anything 12 and over, and no, the clearance weeks are not counted. It's weeks of injections of active compounds.

Lastly (for now), what's a sufficient pct length for a cycle this long, 4 weeks, 6 weeks??
4 is standard and sufficient, IMO.
 
ozarkaBRAND

ozarkaBRAND

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Thanks a lot Mullet.

I'm trying to steer clear of orals in the future, which has got me thinking a lot about longer low dosed test cycles; actually, if I continue to make such good gains naturally (with the help of AP, X-factor, and such) I'm seriously contemplating being natty from now on. We'll see. I'm very excited to see what can be accomplished with my diet and continued use of AP, and pretty soon the addition of X-factor.
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
Thanks a lot Mullet.

I'm trying to steer clear of orals in the future, which has got me thinking a lot about longer low dosed test cycles; actually, if I continue to make such good gains naturally (with the help of AP, X-factor, and such) I'm seriously contemplating being natty from now on. We'll see. I'm very excited to see what can be accomplished with my diet and continued use of AP, and pretty soon the addition of X-factor.
Well, 12 weeks isn't necessarily long. The premise behind low dosed extended cycles are using barely supraphysiological doses of Testosterone for 'cruising' periods - essentially never coming off.

For reasonable lengths such as 12 weeks, you may as well find a balance between safety and efficacy and go with 600mg per week. In reality, good ol' Testosterone should be mandatory for all males over the age of 55 at moderate dosages.
 
ozarkaBRAND

ozarkaBRAND

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
So, for a 12 weeker at 600mg/week, as opposed to a 16 weeker at 400mg/week, you're saying that both should pretty much be equal as far as one's health is concerned? Are you including levels of shutdown in this observation? If not, which type of "long" cycle would you say gives the best chances for a good hpta recovery/normalization?
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
So, for a 12 weeker at 600mg/week, as opposed to a 16 weeker at 400mg/week, you're saying that both should pretty much be equal as far as one's health is concerned? Are you including levels of shutdown in this observation? If not, which type of "long" cycle would you say gives the best chances for a good hpta recovery/normalization?
The cycle which is longer would have more relative 'damage' on the HPTA (seeing as we are speaking about two different dosages of Testosterone, and therefore the same AR binding affinity, and relatively close dosing periods). If we are speaking of a difference of 600mg vs., 400mg, that is only an 800mg total difference over the entire cycle. Now, that 800mg total difference is not going to produce a massive disparity in unwanted side effects - both cosmetic and internal. That being the case, I would opt for the cycle which would produce the greater gains over the relevant dosing period: The 12 weeks @ 600mg.
 
ozarkaBRAND

ozarkaBRAND

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
The cycle which is longer would have more relative 'damage' on the HPTA (seeing as we are speaking about two different dosages of Testosterone, and therefore the same AR binding affinity, and relatively close dosing periods). If we are speaking of a difference of 600mg vs., 400mg, that is only an 800mg total difference over the entire cycle. Now, that 800mg total difference is not going to produce a massive disparity in unwanted side effects - both cosmetic and internal. That being the case, I would opt for the cycle which would produce the greater gains over the relevant dosing period: The 12 weeks @ 600mg.
Very good points. Thanks again Mullet :)
 
ecu19

ecu19

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
The cycle which is longer would have more relative 'damage' on the HPTA (seeing as we are speaking about two different dosages of Testosterone, and therefore the same AR binding affinity, and relatively close dosing periods). If we are speaking of a difference of 600mg vs., 400mg, that is only an 800mg total difference over the entire cycle. Now, that 800mg total difference is not going to produce a massive disparity in unwanted side effects - both cosmetic and internal. That being the case, I would opt for the cycle which would produce the greater gains over the relevant dosing period: The 12 weeks @ 600mg.
Not to tit and tat, but 600mg/week vs. 400mg/week for 12 weeks is a 2,400mg total difference.
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
Not to tit and tat, but 600mg/week vs. 400mg/week for 12 weeks is a 2,400mg total difference.
Well 400mg for 16 weeks is an 800mg difference. ;)

(read the original post)
 
ecu19

ecu19

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
Well 400mg for 16 weeks is an 800mg difference. ;)

(read the original post)
(read the original post before, but thank you for the suggestion) mistook your difference for the difference between 400/600 on just the 12 weeker. :thumbsup:
 
holyintellect

holyintellect

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Im pressed for time, so I didnt read any of the replies to this thread yet, but....

16 weeks isnt really long, especially depending on what you decide to run....Precontest cycles are typically this long (or at least close to it) and guys run like there aint no tomorrow...

To answer your questions though, I dont think frontloading has any validity to it whatsoever...if you want to "jumpstart" your cycle, pick an oral you like an go that route...it'll be more productive...as far as PCT, 4 weeks is gonna be fine no matter how long you run....

holy
 
ozarkaBRAND

ozarkaBRAND

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Im pressed for time, so I didnt read any of the replies to this thread yet, but....

16 weeks isnt really long, especially depending on what you decide to run....Precontest cycles are typically this long (or at least close to it) and guys run like there aint no tomorrow...

To answer your questions though, I dont think frontloading has any validity to it whatsoever...if you want to "jumpstart" your cycle, pick an oral you like an go that route...it'll be more productive...as far as PCT, 4 weeks is gonna be fine no matter how long you run....

holy
As far as a jumpstart goes, I'd like to steer clear of methylated orals that take a shat on hdl/ldl levels. With that said, a kickstart with test prop sounds like a sweeeet deal.
 
nosnmiveins

nosnmiveins

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
As far as a jumpstart goes, I'd like to steer clear of methylated orals that take a shat on hdl/ldl levels. With that said, a kickstart with test prop sounds like a sweeeet deal.

kickstart with prop is probably the best way to go from reading many many threads pertaining to that.

kinda OT, but, as im getting used to injections and not even thinking twice about them, i have a feeling that i will only be using prop from now on as the base for every future cycle
 
ozarkaBRAND

ozarkaBRAND

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
kickstart with prop is probably the best way to go from reading many many threads pertaining to that.

kinda OT, but, as im getting used to injections and not even thinking twice about them, i have a feeling that i will only be using prop from now on as the base for every future cycle
My only concern with using prop for a longer duration such as say, 12 weeks, is the cost. It's not a whole lot more than long estered test, but it is definitely more expensive.
 
nosnmiveins

nosnmiveins

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
My only concern with using prop for a longer duration such as say, 12 weeks, is the cost. It's not a whole lot more than long estered test, but it is definitely more expensive.


very true, i should have mentioned that i dont plan on running cycles more than 8-10 weeks anymore.

im on my 7th week of test e and im not seeing anymore progress weight/size gain wise, strength is climbing but thats it and im eating my a$$ off
 
Royd The Noyd

Royd The Noyd

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
Only b/c it hasnt been mentioned but you should expect some level of suppression after every cycle/pct is complete imo. 4 weeks is a typical recommendation but it will not get you back to baseline. But this is something that should be accepted as part of the game, so to speak.
 
nosnmiveins

nosnmiveins

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Only b/c it hasnt been mentioned but you should expect some level of suppression after every cycle/pct is complete imo. 4 weeks is a typical recommendation but it will not get you back to baseline. But this is something that should be accepted as part of the game, so to speak.

from what ive heard/read:

old fad: Nolva 40/40/20/20

new fad: Nolva 40/20/20/20/20

best option: Nolva 40/20/20/20/20, Clomid 50/50/50
 
Royd The Noyd

Royd The Noyd

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
from what ive heard/read:

old fad: Nolva 40/40/20/20

new fad: Nolva 40/20/20/20/20

best option: Nolva 40/20/20/20/20, Clomid 50/50/50
Depends. I'm a fan of clomid when it comes purely to hpta restoration. A study from a 10 week test only cycle showed HPTA recovery at the 6 month range I believe with the use of clomid/nolva/hcg for a 4 week pct.
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
kickstart with prop is probably the best way to go from reading many many threads pertaining to that.

kinda OT, but, as im getting used to injections and not even thinking twice about them, i have a feeling that i will only be using prop from now on as the base for every future cycle
You say that now, but after a few cycles of EOD injections with presumably more than one compound, you'll tire of constantly ripping through scar tissue.
 
ozarkaBRAND

ozarkaBRAND

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
You say that now, but after a few cycles of EOD injections with presumably more than one compound, you'll tire of constantly ripping through scar tissue.
True that.

You get the whole process down pretty nice though, I guess that's a good thing?
 
holyintellect

holyintellect

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
My only concern with using prop for a longer duration such as say, 12 weeks, is the cost. It's not a whole lot more than long estered test, but it is definitely more expensive.
More of a concern for most people than the cost is the exceedingly large amount of sticks you're gonna have to do with prop only...

holy
 
NasD

NasD

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
ozarka, i'm curious why you're avoiding orals in the future? Also, all orals or just methyls?
 
holyintellect

holyintellect

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
As far as a jumpstart goes, I'd like to steer clear of methylated orals that take a shat on hdl/ldl levels. With that said, a kickstart with test prop sounds like a sweeeet deal.
If you're going to kickstart with prop, why not just run it the entire cycle instead of switching over to something else? Doesnt make sense to me and to be honest I would never even consider that to be logical. To make that feasible you would have to do a lot of extra sticks every week. If you're going to run sustanon, you've got to truly assume that you're blood levels are not going to really peak and get rolling for 3-4 weeks....so for three to four weeks you're going to inject prop EOD until your levels get to where you want them? Thats a total of 14 extra injects, not to mention you're using an ester to kickstart with that sustanon ALREADY has in it...

holy
 
ozarkaBRAND

ozarkaBRAND

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
If you're going to kickstart with prop, why not just run it the entire cycle instead of switching over to something else? Doesnt make sense to me and to be honest I would never even consider that to be logical. To make that feasible you would have to do a lot of extra sticks every week. If you're going to run sustanon, you've got to truly assume that you're blood levels are not going to really peak and get rolling for 3-4 weeks....so for three to four weeks you're going to inject prop EOD until your levels get to where you want them? Thats a total of 14 extra injects, not to mention you're using an ester to kickstart with that sustanon ALREADY has in it...

holy
I never actually mentioned sustanon. I wouldn't mind the few extra needle pokes during those first 4 weeks either. This isn't to say I'll do that for sure, just that it's not that big of a deal to me.
 
ozarkaBRAND

ozarkaBRAND

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
ozarka, i'm curious why you're avoiding orals in the future? Also, all orals or just methyls?
Well, I have hypertension, which is under control with the use of meds, and I don't want to further damage my cardiovascular health. As far as I'm concerned, there is much less risk going with just test as opposed to only methyls, or methyls + test. And, I'm only referring to methyls. Except for maybe anavar, that's mild enough I believe to not be a significant detriment.
 
holyintellect

holyintellect

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
I never actually mentioned sustanon. I wouldn't mind the few extra needle pokes during those first 4 weeks either. This isn't to say I'll do that for sure, just that it's not that big of a deal to me.

Damn....threads are starting to run together in my mind....sorry...other than that I still dont think using prop to kickstart another test ester is wise or efficient, but good luck to ya!

holy
 
ozarkaBRAND

ozarkaBRAND

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Haha, yeah man it happens. Thanks for the input holy!
 
Royd The Noyd

Royd The Noyd

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
Well, I have hypertension, which is under control with the use of meds, and I don't want to further damage my cardiovascular health. As far as I'm concerned, there is much less risk going with just test as opposed to only methyls, or methyls + test. And, I'm only referring to methyls. Except for maybe anavar, that's mild enough I believe to not be a significant detriment.
I know your referring to BP here but just to be clear Var can be very hard on the lipids. Since you mentioned lipids...




For example:

Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1995 Sep;19(9):614-24
Oral anabolic steroid treatment, but not parenteral androgen treatment, decreases abdominal fat in obese, older men.
Lovejoy JC, Bray GA, Greeson CS, Klemperer M, Morris J, Partington C, Tulley R.

Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70808-4124, USA.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of testosterone enanthate (TE), anabolic steroid (AS) or placebo (PL) on regional fat distribution and health risk factors in obese middle-aged men undergoing weight loss by dietary means. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial, carried out for 9 months with primary assessments at 3 month intervals. Due to adverse blood lipid changes, the AS group was switched from oral oxandrolone (ASOX) to parenteral nandrolone decaoate (ASND) after the 3 month assessment point. SUBJECTS: Thirty healthy, obese men, aged 40-60 years, with serum testosterone (T) levels in the low-normal range (2-5 ng/mL). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Abdominal fat distribution and thigh muscle volume by CT scan, body composition by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), insulin sensitivity by the Minimal Model method, blood lipids, blood chemistry, blood pressure, thyroid hormones and urological parameters. RESULTS: After 3 months, there was a significantly greater decrease in subcutaneous (SQ) abdominal fat in the ASOX group compared to the TE and PL groups although body weight changes did not differ by treatment group. There was also a tendency for the ASOX group to exhibit greater losses in visceral fat, and the absolute level of visceral fat in this group was significantly lower at 3 months than in the TE and PL groups. There were significant main effects of treatment at 3 months on serum T and free T (increased in the TE group and decreased in the ASOX group) and on thyroid hormone parameters (T4 and T3 resin uptake significantly decreased in the ASOX group compared with the other two groups). There was a significant decrease in HDL-C, and increase in LDL-C in the ASOX group, which led to their being switched to the parenteral nandrolone decanoate (ASND) after 3 months. ASND had opposite effects on visceral fat from ASOX, producing a significant increase from 3 to 9 months while continuing to decrease SQ abdominal fat. ASND treatment also decreased thigh muscle area, while ASOX treatment increased high muscle. ASND reversed the effects of ASOX on lipoproteins and thyroid hormones. The previously reported effect of T to decrease visceral fat was not observed, in fact, visceral fat in the TE group increased slightly from 3 to 9 months, although SQ fat continued to decrease. Neither TE nor AS treatment resulted in any change in urologic parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Oral oxandrolone decreased SQ abdominal fat more than TE or weight loss alone and also tended to produce favorable changes in visceral fat. TE and ASND injections given every 2 weeks had similar effects to weight loss alone on regional body fat. Most of the beneficial effects observed on metabolic and cardiovascular risk factors were due to weight loss per se. These results suggest that SQ and visceral abdominal fat can be independently modulated by androgens and that at least some anabolic steroids are capable of influencing abdominal fat.

PMID: 8574271
 
ozarkaBRAND

ozarkaBRAND

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Thanks for watching my back on that one Noyd. Guess methyls are gonna have to be avoided pretty much completely.
 

Similar threads


Top