hardknock
Well-known member
Actually when all is said and done this is the most sound advice PERIOD.
Anyone here have optimal (>5-700 ng/dl) test levels after multiple steroid cycles?
- Thread starter Justlooking5
- Start date
Spurfy
Active member
1. Were they taking *ANY* 19-nor compounds?
2. Were they taking pharmaceutical-grade SERMs, or merely who-knows-what "research chemicals?"
3. What were the dosages of the SERMs?
4. What were the dosages on cycle, and which compounds?
I find it very hard to believe that persons on cycle, taking compounds that are not 19-nor, using pharmaceutical-grade SERMs at standard dosages (clomiphene = 25 mg/day, tamoxifen = 20 mg/day, toremifene = 60 mg/day), using reasonable dosages of anabolics (<600 mg/week test, <30 mg/day Dianabol, less than 80 mg/day oxandrolone, etc), were still completely shut down -- defined as below range LH/FSH.
There's simply no way there could be simply "responders" and "non-responders", all other variables being equal. This either works, or it doesn't.
rtmilburn
Well-known member
See I dont know here at all but this is my thoughts. It is yes and no the chemical its self works(the serm) but as some individual can cycle not use pct and walk away with good levels(extremely rare but we've seen it happen) and some look at steriod and need trt for life.
So my guess is some it give them the kick the need and others it wasn't gonna make a difference anyways as they are more prone to shutdown.
Although idk what to think of serms on cycle. As we know from sarm the pure action of binding to the androgen recoptors is suppressive. So in a real cycle it's gonna be much more as enzymatic pathways, more recoptors involved, saturation, etc get involved as well, so you are getting a signal to stop production and the serm forcing production. is this damaging? Idk
What do you guys thinking?
Last edited:
NoAddedHmones
Well-known member
Are you high brah? what did i just read
rtmilburn
Well-known member
Sleep deprived for sure! So I definitely could not be making sense but it made sense to me so idk
hardknock
Well-known member
That is my whole point. You are making the same argument that so many made in 1998-20013ish.
Were they taking non 19nor substances? - who actually truly knows. With this we can ask were they sold something which was mislabeled? The mystery thickens!
Were they using pharmaceutical grade serms? - Id give an educated guess based on over a decade of reading, a very large % took "who knows what". I mean most UGLs aren't exactly skimming the surface of illegitimate, more so very much beneath it.
Were they using responsible amounts? - Again this comes down to whether you believe or not what the people posted. You might as well ask who pissed in my flowers.
Basically this comes full circle and back to individual specifics. Unless it was a controlled study we cannot say. That is why I go back to its a person to person case.
What the studies that you posted(along with 100s of people over 20 years) proves that a person needs to have the patience, mental ability, and motivational spirit to seek out approved medicines and not purchase from jackinthebox pharma at w w w.eatadick.com
How many people on earth actually do this? 2% of the population?
And this is why my premises is that when using aas accept the fact that you will experience permanent subpar testosterone for the rest of your life. Or simply do not use aas and you will more than likely, due to a myriad of other factors, still experience some subpar testosterone levels at some point in your life.
The human mind (for the overwhelming majority) simply cannot allow most to do what you(along with many others) have suggested.
ucheoma
Active member
As someone who has suffered from hypogondism (injury induced most likely) i suspect you may not find the above make much difference. Youve already tried, i vitamin D and some other things. Im afraid you ll find KSM-66, Coconut oil, Zinc etc wont make much of an impact either other than to your wallet. Sorry to be negative and your experience may be different to mine so will be interested to see your results. Ive hopped on Clomid myself after wasting significant sums on useless testboosters and other natty remedies.
I know test will revert to baseline but the way i see it its better to have test elevated 40 to 50 per cent of the year than low throughout the year, Furthermore I'm saving money by not perennially hunting for the natty holy grail of test boosters. Clomid works is less expensive than many of these snake oil test boosting products and, so far, no side effects so a win win for me. ive accepted i cant boost my test levels naturally but at least i can manage/mitigate my condition. Even if the protocol you're experimenting works it will be to insignificant levels and your test will revert to baseline if you stop. Might as well stick with Clomid which definitely works for you
rtmilburn
Well-known member
Agreed. I also do agree that once damage is done it may not be reversable in most cases.
Justlooking5
Active member
Sure, multiple legit studies posted in this thread showing a very high % of ex-AAS users have low testosterone is "broscience," but the completely unfounded belief/rationalization that one will fully recover after a cycle of steroids is not broscience?
The desire to rationalize away potential long term consequences of AAS is very strong. I know, because I did it when I was using them. In general, I think the risks of short term cycles with reasonable dosages (say, Test 600mg/week x 10 weeks) is rather low, with the exception of what I now think is probably the biggest long-term risk of short AAS cycles, permanent HPTA suppression.
Justlooking5
Active member
Given the studies showing, for example, that 15/15 ex-AAS users are in the lower 20% of normal T, or lower, you'd have to argue that somehow only people with genetically low testosterone are choosing to use steroids, and their low levels are not due to being permanently shut down to some degree, but because they always had low test and only people with naturally low test chose to use steroids. It's very implausible.
(With one note, I do think there's some possibility that guys with naturally low test might be drawn to bodybuilding and eventually gear as a way to self medicate, but I doubt that makes up 100% or even t he majority of steroid users.)
Justlooking5
Active member
Nice, it's encouraging, and I notice he stuck to test/dbol/var and no deca.
That said, IMO it's unlikely that his diet is what is making the difference between him and those of us with suppressed levels. For one, I essentially 100% of my food from the local natural grocer, where all produce is organic, meats are grass fed, minimal additives, etc. I eat lots of organic tomatoes,
fruit daily, whole grains, etc.
None of this stuff has made any difference in my own situation. The only constant is that without intervention by something like clomid, my test levels have been between 369-390 since I first got them measured in 2010, and now 12 years after last AAS use. I read about other people like me in the studies showing long-term suppression in AAS users with hypogonadal symptoms and levels in the lower 10-20% like myself (i.e., test levels of avg. 85 year old male).
rtmilburn
Well-known member
I see what you are saying for sure. I'm not gonna act like I know that answers, or anything of the such. Although, I can without a doubt say those studies tell us very little. They don't provide enough information to make the conclusion of what the true long term impact of a proper cycle, with a proper post cycle, will be. Heck as I've said before those studies, if they weren't anti-steriod studies, would be ripped apart by anyone; that knows anything in the medical field.
Although I am more on the side that damage does occur when cycling. Although we cannot make such conclusion for the data we have. Also it is not like anyone is going to publish a study with steriod, that isn't negative towards them; unless they are trying to sell it(ie trest studies showing it being safe and more effective than testosterone, for trt). So the data is of course going to be scewed, not saying all should be ignored; not at all!!
However, I do believe it is 100% false to say a person will be hypogonadal/permanently supersesed, even if they only do one PROPER cycle. This obviously excludes people whom where already hypogonadal, or a geneticly predisposed to being hypogonadal. You might end up slightly lower then before? Sure maybe idk.
There was also theory that ONE heavily androgenic cycle might put you with higher levels then before, by the old gurus. Although I definitely think this is very false though.
Justlooking5
Active member
I agree, in particular with the part about levels always returning to baseline once treatment is discontinued. I did urologist-prescribed clomid in 2010, 2011, and 2012 as mentioned (basically a ton of PCT), my levels always returned to the pre-clomid baseline of about 390 once off clomid for a sufficient amount of time (now 369 years later with good vitamin D level of 42).
(BTW, my urologist was very clear with me that clomid would only TEMPORARILY boost my levels. I at the time was thinking I likely just needed a better run of PCT, and thought the clomid would help "restart" my HPTA per forum wisdom. Wrong. Even after 3 years of using it at 25mg/day for several months at a time, my levels always returned to the baseline of ~390 like my urologist said.)
In 4/2011, 3 months off clomid, I had test at 617 total, and I was taking an herbal that this time (I think nettle). I also know that my free test increased from I think ~60 to ~90 in 2010 when I took nettle.
And there are some decent studies showing people getting improvements in T levels from KSM-66, Zinc, etc. Thus I think it is at least worth a try while I'm waiting to see my urologist.
At the beginning of May I'll be getting the following labs already ordered, and we will see if any of this regimen has made a difference on: Total, Free T, Estrogen, LH.
My current regimen is: KSM-66 600mg/day, Zinc Picolinate 30mg/day, Longjack 100:1 4-800mg/day, 5 on 2 off, Nettle 600mg 3 on 2 off, 10,000 iu vitamin D/day, plus coconut oil, sun bathing, etc.
It's a fairly aggressive regimen using most of the OTC products with decent data behind them, and we'll see if any of it makes a difference. I do feel better on this routine but am skeptical as you are.
At my next test in early May (which I'll post results of) if my levels are not above 500, I'll definitely be trying clomid if my urologist will give it to me again (I'll be seeing him before the retest in May).
If my levels are below 450-500 on the above regimen, I'll consider it either ineffective or minimally effective, and will then probably try clomid for awhile while I decide whether to just go ahead and start TRT.
ericos_bob
Active member
I'm not arguing in favour of steroids not causing hypogonadism or suggesting mostly low T individuals take steroids though this could be plausible to some limited degree. Making the point that there's a real possiblity MANY ex users who feel recovered are suffering mild suppression (low end of normal range) levels due to not ever having taken bloods. Even those that do run tests post use and are found to be in the healthy or even high normal range may well be suffering suppression having not established a baseline.
Justlooking5
Active member
Indeed, very few run pre-cycle bloods currently (especially at least 2 to establish a baseline), and when I was using gear back in the early 2000s, it was even rarer that anyone would get bloodwork.
ChocolateClen
Well-known member
So 1 cycle does irreversible damage?
mmorso
Well-known member
It can. Come on ChocolateClen.
If you only eat rice through PCT definitely... that's why you have no balls mang
Brandinooooo
Well-known member
Lmao.
Brandinooooo
Well-known member
It could if you **** it up but you should be fine if you covered everything
ChocolateClen
Well-known member
I eat rice and lead... from all the bullets that fly around here
ryane87
Well-known member
Boo fcking hoo..."I live in the ghetto" "All I eat is rice" "My rice gets stolen from me" fcking millennial lol
Brandinooooo
Well-known member
LMFAO
mmorso
Well-known member
ChocolateClen and his narratives of victimization... pretty soon it'll be his mothers fault he has no sex drive
mmorso
Well-known member
Brandinooooo we should derail this and turn it into another fat chick pic thread to help all our brothers with low t out...
ChocolateClen
Well-known member
Bruh I'm a special snowflake millennial we've covered this
rtmilburn
Well-known member
Ya his just does put out enough what a b!tch
DUbz86
Well-known member
Don't diss rice one of my favorite carbs haha but definitely worth investing in a rice cooker makes it easy. Or if your in the hood I'm sure a coffee can duct tape and a heat source would work haha
hardknock
Well-known member
Have you tried toremifene?
ryane87
Well-known member
mmorso
Well-known member
hardknock
Well-known member
You're pretty much correct, the only thing that people were really looking at circa 1998-2003 was liver values. I remember in 1997 a "guru" at this gym told me that only worry about liver and the rest would take care of itself. When I asked about testicles size and the shrinking effects(this was the only terminology that I knew of then) he said just do a reverse taper for a few weeks and youll be straight. Lol
rtmilburn
Well-known member
That's my point!!! Up until recently that's what people did to recover that's why these studies unreliable
hardknock
Well-known member
Yes the studies might be a bit unreliable but the sheer numbers do not lie. There are too many people that suffer from low test after a steroid cycle even since 2009 when "proper" pct was the norm.
Ive just never seen in my years someone recover truly from using aas. When I say truly I mean recover and stay recovered for at least a year (except the time I did it for a year) I haven't seen it. However I did forget to mention that me, and my father both had abnormally high testosterone for our ages. Mine was abnormally high at 35 and his was abnormally high at 70. Maybe that saved me? I dont really know.
But I highly doubt we will ever have peer reviewed studies with a group of people that had a years worth of bloodwork pre, took aas for 12 weeks, recovered using proper protocols, then got a years worth of bloodwork starting 4 weeks after the last aas injection and every 3 months up to a year. Its just not feasible for a university or organization to do that. The closest we have are the few hundred studies that are out there and a person just has to review the data and go off of an educated guess. I mean this is literally the max that a person can do. Unless you have access to a real life fortune teller (btw if you do send them my way pronto!) theres really no way of knowing 100%.
If the pros outweigh the cons use aas, if the cons outweigh the pros, do not use them. But ill tell you this much, if I was a pro with hundreds of thousands on the line, along with the well being of my family, I wouldn't hesitate to use again but just for me to look good walking on the beach or to squat 600 just for the "bros", nah...wouldn't touch it.
ChocolateClen
Well-known member
Hey at least I'm never hungry
Justlooking5
Active member
I haven't. Can it be obtained legally? (Through research chem site perhaps?)
Justlooking5
Active member
I did PCT with clomid, arimidex/or nolva from my first cycle onward. I did not do optimal PCT on my last cycle (used an OTC PCT that was supposed to be "sufficient") and it was the only time I had real noticeable problems immediately after coming off, but I had more subtle symptoms (erectile issues etc.) after my first cycle.
Spurfy
Active member
My final thoughts:
1. All 19-nor AAS, dose-dependently, cause some degree of permanent suppression, possibly (or probably) due to functional changes in transcription of hypothalamic ER-alpha.
2. Deca and stanozolol (Winstrol) damage Leydig cells and are probably carcinogenic to the testes
3. The safest AAS for minimizing shutdown is oxandrolone (Anavar). It's also one of the most potent anabolics, 6-10 times as potent as testosterone with almost zero androgenic effects, non-aromatizing, and essentially not liver toxic. One could do an oral-only cycle of Anavar and Toremifene and have some pretty awesome results, while avoiding shutdown and while keeping lipids at safe ranges. On a *totally unrelated note*, there's a new rap group called UGLVar -- three rappers, Alpha, Pharmacom, and Eminence. They are legit rappers with street cred. You're welcome.
4. Testosterone should never exceed 600 mg/week, and probably 300 mg/week should be considered the upper limit.
5. SERMs should be used in standard dosages on cycle to maintain some level of HPG-axis functionality. There are essentially no drawbacks here -- it either works or it doesn't. This will also prevent adrenal suppression. In my opinion, pharma-grade toremifene is the best/safest, followed by clomiphene, and then tamoxifen. Raloxifene is only marginally effective, but raloxifene at 120 mg/day will obliterate gyno very quickly and without any significant side-effects.
6. Dianabol should probably be avoided, due to potential cardiac and testicular risks.
7. If you're going to cycle and you're concerned about permanent HPG-axis effects, only use testosterone and Anavar, with a SERM on cycle and for one month following.
8. Proviron is safe and non-suppressive in doses up to 50 mg/day, is not liver toxic,and is probably beneficial for the testes. It improves sperm quality on its own, and lowers SHBG.
9. AIs are largely useless now. Estrogen control on-cycle should be facilitated with a SERM, and gyno should be aggressively treated with raloxifene.
10. I'll be starting a blog soon, and largely abandoning my posting duties here. I've quit my job in research/academia and will need a creative scientific outlet with a much wider audience.
1. All 19-nor AAS, dose-dependently, cause some degree of permanent suppression, possibly (or probably) due to functional changes in transcription of hypothalamic ER-alpha.
2. Deca and stanozolol (Winstrol) damage Leydig cells and are probably carcinogenic to the testes
3. The safest AAS for minimizing shutdown is oxandrolone (Anavar). It's also one of the most potent anabolics, 6-10 times as potent as testosterone with almost zero androgenic effects, non-aromatizing, and essentially not liver toxic. One could do an oral-only cycle of Anavar and Toremifene and have some pretty awesome results, while avoiding shutdown and while keeping lipids at safe ranges. On a *totally unrelated note*, there's a new rap group called UGLVar -- three rappers, Alpha, Pharmacom, and Eminence. They are legit rappers with street cred. You're welcome.
4. Testosterone should never exceed 600 mg/week, and probably 300 mg/week should be considered the upper limit.
5. SERMs should be used in standard dosages on cycle to maintain some level of HPG-axis functionality. There are essentially no drawbacks here -- it either works or it doesn't. This will also prevent adrenal suppression. In my opinion, pharma-grade toremifene is the best/safest, followed by clomiphene, and then tamoxifen. Raloxifene is only marginally effective, but raloxifene at 120 mg/day will obliterate gyno very quickly and without any significant side-effects.
6. Dianabol should probably be avoided, due to potential cardiac and testicular risks.
7. If you're going to cycle and you're concerned about permanent HPG-axis effects, only use testosterone and Anavar, with a SERM on cycle and for one month following.
8. Proviron is safe and non-suppressive in doses up to 50 mg/day, is not liver toxic,and is probably beneficial for the testes. It improves sperm quality on its own, and lowers SHBG.
9. AIs are largely useless now. Estrogen control on-cycle should be facilitated with a SERM, and gyno should be aggressively treated with raloxifene.
10. I'll be starting a blog soon, and largely abandoning my posting duties here. I've quit my job in research/academia and will need a creative scientific outlet with a much wider audience.
hardknock
Well-known member
Im sure if you show your uro studies and discuss it with him he might prescribe it if its available for prescription.
Or yeah the next best thing is a well known trustworthy ugl. There are some concerns for those with arrhythmia issues though when using toremifene.
Justlooking5
Active member
That has been my thought as well, that AAS (or certain types) are causing permanent suppression by affecting gene expression. Which might explain why the effects are so persistent.
In terms of anecdotal evidence, I'll mention again that my first cycle included 400mg/week deca and 5 weeks of Winstrol, and my second was 650mg/week deca (with other AAS each time). I never used tren or NPP.
Justlooking5
Active member
Yeah I'm debating whether to order clomid via research chem site if none of the providers I'm going to see are willing to help me. Note, I would suggest against having Kaiser if you're dealing with anything like this, thus far all I've heard is "protocol states we will only treat you if your testosterone number is below our threshold." They seem uninterested in your symptoms and more in "following protocol." We'll see if the Kaiser endo I see soon is any different, and I have an appt with the urologist who treated me previously with clomid coming up in May though and it's not through Kaiser.
BTW, it is 100% legal to order say clomid from a research chems site? As in, you're extremely unlikely to get in any legal trouble in the US?
hardknock
Well-known member
Its considered not illegal to order for "research" purposes.
So um yes if you're ordering a personal supply I dont see any reasons for concern however if you're ordering gallons upon gallons with intent to distribute its likely you may get put on a "list".
mcc23
Active member
Get a box of kleenex to go with it
rtmilburn
Well-known member
This is not true for it technically to be legal you have to be a licensed researcher(may I used the wrong term but it something along this line)
Justlooking5
Active member
Update: Started clomid 25mg/day yesterday from my urologist. Already notice some improvements in energy/fatigue. Will be taking it for 6 weeks then will get labs.
During this time I will be considering whether to do several cycles of clomid per year and try to maintain levels >600 in between treatment, or just go on TRT.
During this time I will be considering whether to do several cycles of clomid per year and try to maintain levels >600 in between treatment, or just go on TRT.
paul56778
Well-known member
Does the TRT cater for problem with fertility e.g. through administration of HCG
if not wouldn't the only benefit of using clomid vs trt be to keep testes active and improve chances of fertility for some older individuals fertility is of no concern,
Justlooking5
Active member
Well I'm not as concerned with maintaining fertility as I have been strongly considering a vasectomy at some point anyway.
However, for me the main reasons to be thoughtful about TRT and try clomid first are:
1. Clomid is temporary and flexible and won't tank your natural test levels further. If you want to get off clomid, you likely won't be worse off than before, unlike if you want to get off TRT. For example, what if you had to go off TRT because you couldn't afford the price at some point down the road (200+/mo)?
2. There are potential health risks with TRT, which don't seem to be well understood right now. There are also health risks with clomid, and real apparent health risks with having low testosterone.
3. TRT is expensive. The two TRT clinics I talked to quoted me a price of $200-250/month. I bought enough clomid for 30 days yesterday and it cost 50 bucks.
4. Pre-existing conditions. If you go on TRT I am guessing you officially have the pre-existing condition of hypogonadism. With the new health care bill that just passed the house today, how will that affect your coverage cost? How will it affect your ability to get coverage in the future? I don't think anyone knows this right now and is something that is now more important to consider regarding TRT than it was yesterday. Could you imagine having to pay large premium increases because you started TRT?
At least with clomid I can say my levels (mid-300s) prior to starting it were still in the normal range and, as so many doctors have mentioned to me, technically not below the reference threshold for hypogonadism.
Overall, I am thinking that TRT that would maintain T levels at 800 or above would be preferable to clomid in most ways, but the above considerations are important and that's why I'm taking some time before jumping right now TRT. I also am skeptical about how reversible TRT is if you go off given that the whole reason my levels are suppressed in the first place is AAS use.
However, for me the main reasons to be thoughtful about TRT and try clomid first are:
1. Clomid is temporary and flexible and won't tank your natural test levels further. If you want to get off clomid, you likely won't be worse off than before, unlike if you want to get off TRT. For example, what if you had to go off TRT because you couldn't afford the price at some point down the road (200+/mo)?
2. There are potential health risks with TRT, which don't seem to be well understood right now. There are also health risks with clomid, and real apparent health risks with having low testosterone.
3. TRT is expensive. The two TRT clinics I talked to quoted me a price of $200-250/month. I bought enough clomid for 30 days yesterday and it cost 50 bucks.
4. Pre-existing conditions. If you go on TRT I am guessing you officially have the pre-existing condition of hypogonadism. With the new health care bill that just passed the house today, how will that affect your coverage cost? How will it affect your ability to get coverage in the future? I don't think anyone knows this right now and is something that is now more important to consider regarding TRT than it was yesterday. Could you imagine having to pay large premium increases because you started TRT?
At least with clomid I can say my levels (mid-300s) prior to starting it were still in the normal range and, as so many doctors have mentioned to me, technically not below the reference threshold for hypogonadism.
Overall, I am thinking that TRT that would maintain T levels at 800 or above would be preferable to clomid in most ways, but the above considerations are important and that's why I'm taking some time before jumping right now TRT. I also am skeptical about how reversible TRT is if you go off given that the whole reason my levels are suppressed in the first place is AAS use.
brofessorx
Well-known member
I'd just self medicate. That's the cheapest option.
A 10ml vial of test c is about 30$.
1/2ml 2x per week (200mg/week) and that'll last you 9.5 weeks or so.
7 vials for 210 and you've got over a years worth of test c
A 10ml vial of test c is about 30$.
1/2ml 2x per week (200mg/week) and that'll last you 9.5 weeks or so.
7 vials for 210 and you've got over a years worth of test c