BeastMode 1
Member
Non-methyl cycles and injectables are better for your body and all(compared to methyls)...but are longer cycles and ones that shut you down harder(tren for example) worse for your body (hormone wise) in the long run?
Non-methyl cycles and injectables are better for your body and all(compared to methyls)...but are longer cycles and ones that shut you down harder(tren for example) worse for your body (hormone wise) in the long run?
Suppression is suppression. What matters is how fast you were suppressed and for how long. You can prevent total suppression by using hcg.
If suppression is suppression how can there be "total suppression" and what I'm guessing is "partial suppression"?
wrong
Bridge what?
Overall I'd say pct is better. Don't get hooked and feel like you "need" to be on. Aside from the other negatives, you always want to get in, get swoll, and get out as soon as you can.
Unless you plan on bodybuilding for a living.
Bridge what?
Overall I'd say pct is better. Don't get hooked and feel like you "need" to be on. Aside from the other negatives, you always want to get in, get swoll, and get out as soon as you can.
Unless you plan on bodybuilding for a living.
Hcg, I was just wondering if say last 2 weeks of cycle you add it in then keep it going through pct.
And I agree about it being best during pct I was just trying to pick your brain a bit![]()
the old school method (or you could say common) is to run hcg as a low dosage during your cycle to prevent your testicles from becoming desensitized in the first place.
dr scally is a bit more knowledgable on the subject, and he has a similar recommendation. I haven't looked at the power pct protocol used in a while though. the old school method (or you could say common) is to run hcg at a low dosage during your cycle to prevent your testicles from becoming desensitized in the first place. which way is better, during cycle, or in pct is a endless debate, and one you'll prob never see any data based evidence comparing.
If by newer method you mean the method I've seen recommended since as long as I can remember, well, I guess so. Could be cause I'm only 30, I don't know what they were doing in the 90's, 80's, or 70's. Never looked back that far.
I could be wrong, and would love some links showing methods used for Hcg from those times.
Till then, the power pct is the only data bc based pct protocol for steroid induced hypogonadism I've seen.
I should've just posted "Wrong" the way you like do to people when they make a mistake. LOL
I'm pretty sure I didn't make any mistakes. But if there is data showing showing it, ill humbly accept, an learn something new