Recovery times for short vs medium vs long cycles

[Samgotti18]

Is there a general consensus around how recovery from a cycle is affected by the length of the cycle?

Let's say:

6 weeks @ 300mg/w of Test E
12 weeks @ 300mg/w of Test
18-24 weeks @ 300mg/w of Test E

Does it matter to our body for how long we've been shut down or should you be able to get back to pre-cycle levels a lot quicker with a 6 week cycle compared to a 20 week cycle?

I keep reading people saying that once you're shut down, you're shut down and there is no difference between a 6 week and a 12 week cycle. Is there any literature on this?

 

[Nac]

Is there anything scientific and quantifiable? No.

Is there anything anecdotally that ranges from within 2 weeks to never? Yes.

 

[PhantomReaper]

A lot of guys believe..Time on =Time Off..
But..nothing carved in stone..
Long runs..of course longer OFF..
Bloodwork is a great judge..
Comparing it to pre-cycle work..
The longer the run, the longer your markers will be high or out- of- range..
Letting the body have a break is most wise..
It's the long Game Brother...
At 57...I've been playing it safe since 97...
Z...

 

[KvanH]

I don't think we have any numbers or statistics on that, like Nac said. But when test production is low or non-existent, the leydig cells in the testes can become desensitized to LH, so the longer the testes are without a signal to produce test, the longer the recovery can take and the less likely a full recovery can become.

Based on anecdotal evidence, the differences between individuals seems to have a greater effect though. So person A may recover better and quicker from a 20 week cycle or even years of TRT, than person B recovers from a 6 week cycle. The cause and effect relationship between the duration of being suppressed and recovery should still apply to a degree. At least in theory.