why be lean and pin?

Brolic

Brolic

Banned
question, i plan to pin for my next run, every one tells me i should be lean. how lean should you be?
 
It's not that you need to be lean but there's a couple factors

1 is that steroids will be more potent if you have less bodyfat because (correct me if i'm wrong) their lipophilic profile makes them store in fat tissue, and operate (androgenically) on it.

2 is that your gains will be more visible when you are leaner, and that makes for a happier cycle.

It'll be easier to pin glutes, but that doesn't matter because there's plenty of injection sites that you don't need to be lean for.

Overall, based on nothing but my personal opinion, i think you should be under 14% bodyfat before you cycle. 12% and under is best so you look good on cycle, if you high have bodyfat and then get some bloat going, it doesn't look so nice.
 
Main reason why someone would tell you that is to make sure you're safe when actually pinning, hitting the muscle instead of injecting into fat. What's your BF %?
 
Brolic said:
question, i plan to pin for my next run, every one tells me i should be lean. how lean should you be?
Click to expand...

Your mates are telling you because some idiots take winstrol thinking its gonna take them from 20% to 6% bf. Before you start using AAS you need to have a strong base already establish. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A CUTTING STEROID ETC.
 
UnrealMachine said:
It's not that you need to be lean but there's a couple factors

1 is that steroids will be more potent if you have less bodyfat because (correct me if i'm wrong) their lipophilic profile makes them store in fat tissue, and operate (androgenically) on it.

2 is that your gains will be more visible when you are leaner, and that makes for a happier cycle.

It'll be easier to pin glutes, but that doesn't matter because there's plenty of injection sites that you don't need to be lean for.

Overall, based on nothing but my personal opinion, i think you should be under 14% bodyfat before you cycle. 12% and under is best so you look good on cycle, if you high have bodyfat and then get some bloat going, it doesn't look so nice.
Click to expand...

those are good reasons for cycling and having a low body fat. also, testosterone levels and GH levels are higher when you are leaner, so lets consider that recovery in PCT would be much easier.
 
trackstud100m said:
Wow, you again, please list one steroid that will take someone from 20% to 6% without the proper diet and workout plan. Wait ill answer it for you, NONE. and bingo was his name o.
Click to expand...
This post reminds me of third grade. Not just because the lame jingle, but the reasoning sounds like something a third grader with down sydrome might say.

Much love tho man, but its a proven fact that some hormones (including some of the steroids we can inject) can drop bodyfat, as well as the Prevention of certain hormones that will keep bodyfat ON you.
 
trackstud100m said:
Wow, you again, please list one steroid that will take someone from 20% to 6% without the proper diet and workout plan. Wait ill answer it for you, NONE. and bingo was his name o.
Click to expand...

Oh so NOW we expand the criteria. Nice work.
Why don't you list one steroid that will add 35 pounds to someone without proper diet and workout plan?


.............
 
trackstud100m said:
Your mates are telling you because some idiots take winstrol thinking its gonna take them from 20% to 6% bf. Before you start using AAS you need to have a strong base already establish. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A CUTTING STEROID ETC.
Click to expand...
I wouldnt use AAS for cut, only for a bulk. i start my trial precontest diet in april and im going to come down to 200( thats gonna be a site to see). THEN I WANTED TO RUN TEST, (after many weeks of research of pct and tricks
 
UnrealMachine said:
It's not that you need to be lean but there's a couple factors

1 is that steroids will be more potent if you have less bodyfat because (correct me if i'm wrong) their lipophilic profile makes them store in fat tissue, and operate (androgenically) on it.

2 is that your gains will be more visible when you are leaner, and that makes for a happier cycle.

It'll be easier to pin glutes, but that doesn't matter because there's plenty of injection sites that you don't need to be lean for.

Overall, based on nothing but my personal opinion, i think you should be under 14% bodyfat before you cycle. 12% and under is best so you look good on cycle, if you high have bodyfat and then get some bloat going, it doesn't look so nice.
Click to expand...
thank you, my glutes are huge. i havve strech marks
 
UnrealMachine said:
It's not that you need to be lean but there's a couple factors

1 is that steroids will be more potent if you have less bodyfat because (correct me if i'm wrong) their lipophilic profile makes them store in fat tissue, and operate (androgenically) on it.
Click to expand...

Steroids won't make you fat. I don't believe you have AR's in adipose tissue.

Think of your blood vessels in adipose tissue like a labyrinth: once the blood gets in there, it gets lost and doesn't leave. So you inject the steroids into your muscle, it slowly disperses into the bloodstream, gets "activated" in the liver, and now it's off to find some AR's to bind to. Some of the blood will travel into fat tissue, never to return again (so to speak). The more fat tissue you have, the more blood and steroids are able to get caught in there, the more steroids you will need to take to get the same effect as if your fat-ass was 20lbs lighter.
 
trackstud100m said:
Wow, you again, please list one steroid that will take someone from 20% to 6% without the proper diet and workout plan. Wait ill answer it for you, NONE. and bingo was his name o.
Click to expand...

Anavar and tren have both been proven to cause fat loss. They won't take you from 20% to 6% but f you were 11-12% they may take you down to 8-9%.
 
Higher bodyfat means higher aromatase levels & activity. That's going to play a huge role in most cycles.
 
thesinner said:
Steroids won't make you fat. I don't believe you have AR's in adipose tissue.

Think of your blood vessels in adipose tissue like a labyrinth: once the blood gets in there, it gets lost and doesn't leave. So you inject the steroids into your muscle, it slowly disperses into the bloodstream, gets "activated" in the liver, and now it's off to find some AR's to bind to. Some of the blood will travel into fat tissue, never to return again (so to speak). The more fat tissue you have, the more blood and steroids are able to get caught in there, the more steroids you will need to take to get the same effect as if your fat-ass was 20lbs lighter.
Click to expand...

Thanks, that's the wording i was trying to look for.
 
lipids, cholesterol, blood pressure, and general health will be better if you cycle at lower bf%.

it is also a common bbing practice to diet/restrict calories pre-cycle to 'prime' the body for growth.
 
No need to be lean. You would have to be really obese if you can't hit the muscles. If thats the case you could use fina. Sometimes they give you free injection guns lol you could just pop that behind the ear like a steer.
 
tren winny and masteron + a solid cutting diet gets me from 12 to about 5% in 8 weeks.. they help..but without dieting right i would be nowhere below 10% after the cycle.
 
nephilim666 said:
tren winny and masteron + a solid cutting diet gets me from 12 to about 5% in 8 weeks.. they help..but without dieting right i would be nowhere below 10% after the cycle.
Click to expand...


Thank you, thats my point. You can get cut on anything if you take the correct amount and have a proper diet and workout plan.
 
trackstud100m said:
Your mates are telling you because some idiots take winstrol thinking its gonna take them from 20% to 6% bf. Before you start using AAS you need to have a strong base already establish. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A CUTTING STEROID ETC.
Click to expand...

No i believe your point was in all caps there and it is simply not true. You can get cut on anything but that has nothing to do with the fact that some steroids will lean you out without changing diet at all.

Go ahead and change your argument again you are only making a fool out of yourself in this thread...
 
trackstud100m said:
Thank you, thats my point. You can get cut on anything if you take the correct amount and have a proper diet and workout plan.
Click to expand...

You are dumb

negged
 
Hank Vangut said:
lipids, cholesterol, blood pressure, and general health will be better if you cycle at lower bf%.

it is also a common bbing practice to diet/restrict calories pre-cycle to 'prime' the body for growth.
Click to expand...

^This. Also to help avoid aromatization and estrogenical sides. At least thats my understanding.
 
Brolic said:
prime? like an anabolic rebound?
Click to expand...

no. primed as in increasing insulin sensitivity.
check out the first few chapters of 'building the perfect beast'.

it covers the process of dieting down before a cycle to increase insulin sensitivity so once you start a cycle and increase calories your body is primed and much more efficient at building quality mass.
 
Smiley said:
No i believe your point was in all caps there and it is simply not true. You can get cut on anything but that has nothing to do with the fact that some steroids will lean you out without changing diet at all.

Go ahead and change your argument again you are only making a fool out of yourself in this thread...
Click to expand...

Some steroids are more anti-catabolic than others [due to A:A ratios], less prone to Aldosterone proliferation [the compound which causes bloat], less prone to aromatization, and have less of an effect on appetite increase. Any compound may be used for bulking and cutting, but I believe Rugger was trying to say some are more suited than others.
 
Hank Vangut said:
no. primed as in increasing insulin sensitivity.
check out the first few chapters of 'building the perfect beast'.

it covers the process of dieting down before a cycle to increase insulin sensitivity so once you start a cycle and increase calories your body is primed and much more efficient at building quality mass.
Click to expand...
is this a book? That sound just like a anabolic rebound..
 
Hank Vangut said:
no. primed as in increasing insulin sensitivity.
check out the first few chapters of 'building the perfect beast'.

it covers the process of dieting down before a cycle to increase insulin sensitivity so once you start a cycle and increase calories your body is primed and much more efficient at building quality mass.
Click to expand...
Invalid Link Removed
 
Hank Vangut said:
no. primed as in increasing insulin sensitivity.
check out the first few chapters of 'building the perfect beast'.
Click to expand...
I'd steer clear of that book. L. Rea has no idea what he's talking about half the time. For example, he cites the abstract from Invalid Link Removed and then totally misinterprets it. He concludes that "DNP aids in inducing an environment of insulin resistance in adipose sites thus decreasing the ability for fat cells to get food." Umm, no, that's not what the study said at all. The whole point was that DNP did NOT induce insulin resistance like glucosamine does, desite the fact that both lower the ATP content in cells. Thus, the insulin resistance seen with glucosamine is not due to ATP depletion, but something else. He obviously never took a look at the full text, where right in the introduction they say "For study, we employed sodium azide (NaN3) and dinitrophenol (DNP), which affect mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation and subsequently lower cellular ATP content. We failed to induce insulin resistance in 3T3-L1 adipocytes with NaN3 and DNP." He gets things wrong like this all the time. The book if full of bro-logic, half-baked reasoning, and an inability to interpret research. Don't waste your time.

BTW, his recipe for "controlled catabolism" is probably nothing more than what's observed with glycogen depletion followed by supercompensation.
 
Herd said:
^This. Also to help avoid aromatization and estrogenical sides. At least thats my understanding.
Click to expand...
Right, you want to maximize the anabolical effects and minimize the estrogenical and androgenical. That should help limit the catabolical effects. Also, I hear dbol can help you to be more diabolical.
 
Conciliator said:
I'd steer clear of that book. L. Rea has no idea what he's talking about half the time. For example, he cites the abstract from Invalid Link Removed and then totally misinterprets it. He concludes that "DNP aids in inducing an environment of insulin resistance in adipose sites thus decreasing the ability for fat cells to get food." Umm, no, that's not what the study said at all. The whole point was that DNP did NOT induce insulin resistance like glucosamine does, desite the fact that both lower the ATP content in cells. Thus, the insulin resistance seen with glucosamine is not due to ATP depletion, but something else. He obviously never took a look at the full text, where right in the introduction they say "For study, we employed sodium azide (NaN3) and dinitrophenol (DNP), which affect mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation and subsequently lower cellular ATP content. We failed to induce insulin resistance in 3T3-L1 adipocytes with NaN3 and DNP." He gets things wrong like this all the time. The book if full of bro-logic, half-baked reasoning, and an inability to interpret research. Don't waste your time.

BTW, his recipe for "controlled catabolism" is probably nothing more than what's observed with glycogen depletion followed by supercompensation.
Click to expand...

oh, i agree. it's not hard to see that he is just a meat head spewing broscience. he's not publishing a scientific journal.
but some of these passed on bodybuilding practices work even though science hasn't proven them.

i'm sure glycogen depletion/loading has a lot to do with the results of his controlled catabolism recipe.
but there is science supporting the fact that calorie restriction greatly improves insulin sensitivity. and working to enhance insulin sensitivity right before you start a cycle seems very beneficial for a mass building perspective.
 
Last edited:
u make good points, great points.

I wanted to run test-e , but i can only find test -c whats the big diffe... i gotta of research to do AFTER finals
 
thank you all for ur help/// my next step is to finsh my bulk and learn about pct for test and find a in person source
 
trackstud100m said:
Wow, you again, please list one steroid that will take someone from 20% to 6% without the proper diet and workout plan. Wait ill answer it for you, NONE. and bingo was his name o.
Click to expand...

I can't think of one that would do it without proper diet and training, but you won't put on mass with a 'bulking' compound without diet or training either. Any compound that does not aromatize and therefore doesn't cause estrogenic sides like fat/water retention can help you cut by helping you retain strength and muscle tissue while going on a lower calorie diet than usual, hence the term 'cutting' steroid. it doesn't have to literally mean 'makes you burn fat'. And by the way, copy/paste this into your favorite search engine:

J Anim Sci 1987 May, 64 (5) : 1428-33

that'll bring up a study that claims trenbolone does indeed act directly to reduce bodyfat.
EDIT: here's a direct link to the study:
Invalid Link Removed
Trenbolone acetate alone had no detectable effect on lipogenesis in the intact heifer, but the combination of ovariectomy and trenbolone acetate caused substantial decreases in enzyme activities, in most cases a significant decrease as compared with ovariectomized heifers. The data suggest that trenbolone acetate is able to depress lipogenesis only when not competing with the effects of circulating estradiol.
Click to expand...

In english, as long as you have a sufficient dose of tren in your system vs. the amount of estrogen going around, it has a direct inhibiting effect on storing fat. Not saying this sets anything in stone, but as you can see, for 20 years there have been scientists claiming rather bluntly that tren helps reduce fat.
 
Last edited:
if you are fat and you do AAS, its like putting 1000hp twin turbo engine in a mini-van. No one gives a sh*t. No one notices. You don't gain anything out of the expensive and risky run on your body besides power. I mean if you don't really care about definition and your all about strength then hell yea.

If you are down below 12-13% body fat and you use AAS, you'll look like you are exploding just from the visible veinage and pumps, even if you gain 3lbs of muscle

I know people who are like 20% bf that cycle and they just look like your average fat powerlifter...not bodybuilders. By the end of a cycle they just look bigger in general. Definitely not more muscular.


IMO, if you are up there in the BF%, cut naturally and save the time money and expense and use those pins later in life once you have dropped down. You will loose alot of muscle cutting if you are high BF generally. Use steroids to recover from cuts and look great when you are at low BF.

Im currently busting my ass off to get my BF down a percent or two for my upcoming cycle. I'm running pheraplex which is a dirty wet bulker and I want to see the results...I don't want to just turn into a water matress with a spare tire...defeats the whole purpose.
 
trackstud100m said:
Thank you, thats my point. You can get cut on anything if you take the correct amount and have a proper diet and workout plan.
Click to expand...


got pretty lean taking 375mg/wk of TE with calorie deficit...it was really easy leaning out.

you could use any anabolics as long as you dont go crazy with dosage (if its an aromatizing compound) and watch the sodium intake to lessen the bloat.

i think you guys are splitting hair here...both true from my experience; some AAS can burn fat, any AAS will help during dieting down.

anyways, 14% is not fat, jab away. Use 1.5'' if you are concerned. oops, hes banned lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top