Win a Free Copy of ANABOLIC PHARMACOLOGY

What is in your opinion the most effective test dose, following a test/nolva/fina cycle, for a first timer, and more experienced athlete, who has been using pharmaceutical aids for 10 yrs, or would you say that someone who is not looking at building huge amount of muscle, but keep his athleticism wouldn't even need to increase that dose?

Are you more of the "low doses will get you long lasting results and fewer side effects", or "get the most out of each cycle, and don't do any pussy stuff" school of thought? Option a) would be he guy doing 250mg/week, option b) 800mg/week, concidering 250mg would be the lowest dose for someone to see results?


Very informative thread.
 
RSR36 said:
We have SERMs that lock into receptors selectively and "block" the actions of estrogen in that target tissue. We have SARMs now that selectively lock into target tissues and exert an anabolic/ androgen like effect. Regarding Adrogenetic Alopeca, we have 2 Alpha Reductase Inhibitors that inhibit formation of DHT... Why is there no Modulator that could target the androgen receptor locally (like a SARM) in the scalp and skin and block the local binding of DHT in those tissues, but allow DHT to remain circulating (like a SERM does with Estrogen). Is this possible down the road?inhibiting DHT seems risky for bodybuilders overall. Blocking it would be better, I think?
Click to expand...

Good stuff, selectivly blocking DHT would be great.
 
RSR36 said:
We have SERMs that lock into receptors selectively and "block" the actions of estrogen in that target tissue. We have SARMs now that selectively lock into target tissues and exert an anabolic/ androgen like effect. Regarding Adrogenetic Alopeca, we have 2 Alpha Reductase Inhibitors that inhibit formation of DHT... Why is there no Modulator that could target the androgen receptor locally (like a SARM) in the scalp and skin and block the local binding of DHT in those tissues, but allow DHT to remain circulating (like a SERM does with Estrogen). Is this possible down the road?inhibiting DHT seems risky for bodybuilders overall. Blocking it would be better, I think?
Click to expand...

Lowering DHT is only risky from a libido standpoint since DHT does not play a direct role in muscle hypertrophy. DHT is deactivated in skeletal muscle by 3-alpha hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase and only very high DHT levels (in a physiological sense) will overcome this deactivation.
 
Marc-Antony said:
What is in your opinion the most effective test dose, following a test/nolva/fina cycle, for a first timer, and more experienced athlete, who has been using pharmaceutical aids for 10 yrs, or would you say that someone who is not looking at building huge amount of muscle, but keep his athleticism wouldn't even need to increase that dose?

Are you more of the "low doses will get you long lasting results and fewer side effects", or "get the most out of each cycle, and don't do any pussy stuff" school of thought? Option a) would be he guy doing 250mg/week, option b) 800mg/week, concidering 250mg would be the lowest dose for someone to see results?


Very informative thread.
Click to expand...

I am more of the "low doses will get you long lasting results and fewer side effects" school of thought. It's difficult to "not be a pussy" when you have a heart attack in your 40's -- just ask Mike Matarazzo. My goal would be to use the lowest dose possible to see the desired results -- since everyone's goals are different, dose selection would be highly personalized. The only caveat ould be to make sure your goals are realistic.
 
sethroberts said:
I am more of the "low doses will get you long lasting results and fewer side effects" school of thought. It's difficult to "not be a pussy" when you have a heart attack in your 40's -- just ask Mike Matarazzo. My goal would be to use the lowest dose possible to see the desired results -- since everyone's goals are different, dose selection would be highly personalized. The only caveat ould be to make sure your goals are realistic.
Click to expand...


This is one of the best statements I have read on this forum!
 
sethroberts said:
I am more of the "low doses will get you long lasting results and fewer side effects" school of thought. It's difficult to "not be a pussy" when you have a heart attack in your 40's -- just ask Mike Matarazzo. My goal would be to use the lowest dose possible to see the desired results -- since everyone's goals are different, dose selection would be highly personalized. The only caveat ould be to make sure your goals are realistic.
Click to expand...

Do you go into more details on this subject (doses vs. goals) in your book. I would be interested to read more on the subject. Because, I feel that quite too often in this community, lifters overdose on pharmaceutical aids, when they could achieve the same results with lower doses, safer cycles, and a bit more time.
 
The book talks about the overuse of using drugs to counteract the effect of the AAS drugs. Making your body into a pharmacy....The AAS is causing bloating, DHT sides, maybe prolactin probe? We just say here use this drugs (AI, Proscar, Caber) that have more sides and unknown interactions. He stressed some about that and using the least amount of RX.
 
When using testosterone at high doses for extended periods of time is it possible for your body to adapt by binding to a high amount of the test resulting in a low free test, rendering much of what you inject usless?
 
just read through whole thread this may be best thread i have come across you have answered so many ?'s and put a whole new prespective in place for me about AAS
 
Chargerfball25 said:
The book talks about the overuse of using drugs to counteract the effect of the AAS drugs. Making your body into a pharmacy....The AAS is causing bloating, DHT sides, maybe prolactin probe? We just say here use this drugs (AI, Proscar, Caber) that have more sides and unknown interactions. He stressed some about that and using the least amount of RX.
Click to expand...

This basically covers it. I don't want to seem too preachy because I am a human being too and I know the temptations.
 
cloc said:
When using testosterone at high doses for extended periods of time is it possible for your body to adapt by binding to a high amount of the test resulting in a low free test, rendering much of what you inject usless?
Click to expand...

Yes. You will likely also see increases in degradation pathways including aromatase and 5-alpha reductase among others.
 
Seth, I have been interested in the relationship of synthetic progestins with proandrogenic/antiandrogenic effects lately. It appears to me that 19-nor derivatives seem to have proandrogenic effects in certain dosages - in terms of effects on SHBG synthesis, causing genomic changes to the AR, and so on - and antiandrogenic effects in other dosages. What are your thoughts then on progestin-based compound choice in terms of when and how in a cycle to most effectively use them?
 
Mulletsoldier said:
Seth, I have been interested in the relationship of synthetic progestins with proandrogenic/antiandrogenic effects lately. It appears to me that 19-nor derivatives seem to have proandrogenic effects in certain dosages - in terms of effects on SHBG synthesis, causing genomic changes to the AR, and so on - and antiandrogenic effects in other dosages. What are your thoughts then on progestin-based compound choice in terms of when and how in a cycle to most effectively use them?
Click to expand...

I think you may be confusing "androgenic effects" with actions coming as a result of androgen receptor stimulation. Nandrolone stimulates the androgen receptor quite well and will do so in all tissues except those expressing 5-alpha reductase -- in those tissues it will have a lower effect than DHT or even testosterone because dihydronandrolone is not very potent. These are the anti-androgenic effects that you would be referring to.
 
cloc said:
what are the diffrent courses of action someone can take when they get to this point?
Click to expand...

Taper off and undergo PCT or increase the dose. I think at pharmacological doses that the body is unlikely to compensate enough to render the exogenous test totally ineffective though.
 
HardTrainer said:
Hi Seth,
What's your view on using ACE-inhibitors on-cycle to counteract high blood pressure? Good idea or not?
Click to expand...

This goes back to the polypharmacy issue . I don't believe in adding in a drug when you can reduce the side effect without a drug. Decreasing sodium intake and/or reducing the dose would be my first options. Angiotensin II has been shown to be necessary for skeletal muscle hypertrophy so taking an ACEi will reduce gains, so why not just decrease the dose? High blood pressure is a particularly insidious and dangerous side effect because it cuases damage to the cardiovascular and renal systems quietly. the root cause of the water retention is largely mediated through the aldosteorne system so an antimineralocorticoid might be a better choice but then there is a possibility of excess plasma potassium since antimineralocorticoids can cause potassium retention and so can AAS -- of course, excess potassium can be very dangerous. These are the kinds of problems you can run into when you start combining drugs. Side effects that may be annoying with one drug can become deadly when combined with another.
 
Dear Seth,

I hope this doesn't seem like a stupid question (I rarely post on these forums, I just usually read posts and information)... I take red yeast rice on a regular basis because I genetically have high cholesterol and of course its mechanisms are identical to statin drugs.

So if one were to go on a cycle should he/she continue their regular dosage of red yeast rice in addition to any liver supporting supplements (since they usually have some red yeast rice)? Or should they come off it and only use the support supplements?

Thanks.
 
magicseaweed said:
I take red yeast rice on a regular basis because I genetically have high cholesterol and of course its mechanisms are identical to statin drugs.
Click to expand...

if you are in the US, you realize that all RYR sold any longer has the lovastatin removed so shows no effectiveness against cholesterol right?
 
I'm a pharmacology student, I definately want this lol, wish I could think of something better than this:
what receptors would need to be Antagonised to allow for the release of GnRH while on an AAS/DS//PH cycle?
 
Hey EasyEJL, yes I've heard that but I think a lot of the companies still make it the standard way, they just don't list it on the ingredient. I'm actually doing a trial with red yeast rice for my undergraduate thesis, and so far we are getting results with 20-30 % reduction in total cholesterol.

In fact I've come across one that says "1.7% monoacolins" on the box and its being sold in the US. I wanted post a picture but I'm not sure how to do it, and I think my post count is too low anyway.

I see you're from Tampa, I'm on the East in Daytona Beach.
 
magicseaweed said:
Hey EasyEJL, yes I've heard that but I think a lot of the companies still make it the standard way, they just don't list it on the ingredient. I'm actually doing a trial with red yeast rice for my undergraduate thesis, and so far we are getting results with 20-30 % reduction in total cholesterol.

In fact I've come across one that says "1.7% monoacolins" on the box and its being sold in the US. I wanted post a picture but I'm not sure how to do it, and I think my post count is too low anyway.

I see you're from Tampa, I'm on the East in Daytona Beach.
Click to expand...

yeah, well its not legal for them to do that :) Not that I agree with it, but the FDA considers it a drug that is not available for OTC sales. So don't post the pic anyhow ;)
 
EasyEJL said:
yeah, well its not legal for them to do that :) Not that I agree with it, but the FDA considers it a drug that is not available for OTC sales. So don't post the pic anyhow ;)
Click to expand...

That's true. I will have the complete results of my senior thesis in December, obviously thats awhile from now but I'll let you know if the results are significant or not (we're not using that 1.7 monacolin one, just a standard one being sold at some vitamin shop).
 
EasyEJL said:
if you are in the US, you realize that all RYR sold any longer has the lovastatin removed so shows no effectiveness against cholesterol right?
Click to expand...

That is what I thought as well. I guess there are still some products that are flying under the radar. There is also a possibility that there may be another constituent that lowers cholesterol.
 
sethroberts said:
That is what I thought as well. I guess there are still some products that are flying under the radar. There is also a possibility that there may be another constituent that lowers cholesterol.
Click to expand...

If there is, a drug company will research it, patent it, get fda approval for it and it will get yanked too :)
 
Chargerfball25 said:
I have a love/hate relationship with Pharm companies ha.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, I think Pharma companies are demonized in the media. Don't get me wrong, they are no angels but they are not the evil, all powerful FDA-controlling monsters that they are made out to be. Lovastatin got yanked not because Pharma wanted it (they already had it and it was off patent) but because the FDA deemed it a drug - and rightfully so. HMG-COa reductase inhibitors are no joke -- especially in people who are strenously exercising and may be taking AAS.
 
And I have to agree as well that if a company has spent the millions of dollars in trials to prove efficacy and safety that they deserve to have sole ownership of it as well.
 
EasyEJL said:
And I have to agree as well that if a company has spent the millions of dollars in trials to prove efficacy and safety that they deserve to have sole ownership of it as well.
Click to expand...

At least for a period of time. Also, if a nutritional supplement company were to do research and patent a new ingredient then Pharma would notbe able to infringe on that patent -- they would have to buy it if they wanted it.
 
Yeah, i did mean for a length of time, that is how the FDA has it structured. It would be interesting to see a supplement company go through the necessary effort to get that. Sabinsa probably had the revenue from Forslean to do it with that.
 
Ok, the chance to win a free copy is closed. Is there anyone who has posted who does not want to be in the running? Also, just because there is no longer a chance of winning doesn't mean we have to stop the qeustion and answer so feel free to ask questins. I will select the winner(s) in the next couple of days..
 
Sounds good. I am always filled with questions about Anabolics. In reality the moment you stop asking questions, or think you know it all, I think is when you have unknowingly became your own enemy. Body Building is like a writing or book, It can always be improved, every text can always be modified, no piece is ever truly finished, it is an ongoing story.
 
Zero V said:
Sounds good. I am always filled with questions about Anabolics. In reality the moment you stop asking questions, or think you know it all, I think is when you have unknowingly became your own enemy. Body Building is like a writing or book, It can always be improved, every text can always be modified, no piece is ever truly finished, it is an ongoing story.
Click to expand...
Now there's a philosophy I can't argue with :thumbsup:
 
Seth, what do you think about cycles without a Test base. Since my first cycle in 1991, I have only ran steroids without Test 2x. What about using EQ or Primobolan and Turinabol with HCG 2x per week at 250iu to maintain some natural Test output.
 
RSR36 said:
Seth, what do you think about cycles without a Test base. Since my first cycle in 1991, I have only ran steroids without Test 2x. What about using EQ or Primobolan and Turinabol with HCG 2x per week at 250iu to maintain some natural Test output.
Click to expand...

I don't believe you need test as a base with every cycle -- it depends on what ou are tring to do and if you can stand some libido loss. Primo with turinabol will result in dry lean gains but will likely kill your libido. Eq and tbol will probably be ok as far as libido is concerned. Both of them would be fairly mild.
 
Since the "contest" is closed, I have kinda a weird question you may or may not want to field. What benefits could an older person expect from taking test on a hormone replacement type program, ie: TRT, without any resistance or weight training program? Other than feeling better, libido, etc, would there be effects like positive lbm changes, greater energy, fatloss, and prevention of further muscle wasting(in older males). Or would the latter benefits only come with weight training. This isnt a loaded question, and I believe I know the answers, but I wanted to see your opinion, as I believe Ive read once that prevention of muscle wasting was a goal of certain steroids(in non athletes).
 
i'll tell you that answer :) Depending of course on both initial T levels, initial muscle + bf levels, other hormone levels, and amount of T prescribed most would see an increase in lean muscle and decrease in fat. That is where many steroids are currently used - for patients with wasting diseases and sometimes for post surgery recovery if the person has lost a lot of mass over the span of time in the hospital
 
EasyEJL said:
i'll tell you that answer :) Depending of course on both initial T levels, initial muscle + bf levels, other hormone levels, and amount of T prescribed most would see an increase in lean muscle and decrease in fat. That is where many steroids are currently used - for patients with wasting diseases and sometimes for post surgery recovery if the person has lost a lot of mass over the span of time in the hospital
Click to expand...

I agree, and I was eluding to the same point. As I wrote, Ive read about muscle wasting prevention, but I cant recall if Test was one such specified steroid for this condition, and the surgery and disease scenarios are the "extreme" examples, although very valid, I was kind of trying to gauge the responses for "normal" older males, because I for one, see the potential, given the widening "general" acceptance of TRT programs, that Test replacement may one day become as common place for men as ERT is now for women.
 
Nice thread Seth.

Simple question, should some forms of cardio (whether HIIT or low intensity cardio) be avoided while on cycle to decrease the chance of any hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

This seems to be the scariest and most likely long term side effect that I'm aware of from AAS use/abuse.
 
RoadBlocK said:
I agree, and I was eluding to the same point. As I wrote, Ive read about muscle wasting prevention, but I cant recall if Test was one such specified steroid for this condition, and the surgery and disease scenarios are the "extreme" examples, although very valid, I was kind of trying to gauge the responses for "normal" older males, because I for one, see the potential, given the widening "general" acceptance of TRT programs, that Test replacement may one day become as common place for men as ERT is now for women.
Click to expand...

i partially answered because i can attest to it personally :) Probably the only holdback of test replacement becoming as common for men is prostate issues as finasteride and durasteride have their own slew of side effects and its hard to put an older man on that. plus other than test undeconate there isnt any good orally available.
 
Royd The Noyd said:
Nice thread Seth.

Simple question, should some forms of cardio (whether HIIT or low intensity cardio) be avoided while on cycle to decrease the chance of any hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

This seems to be the scariest and most likely long term side effect that I'm aware of from AAS use/abuse.
Click to expand...

I'll wait for Seth to give the official answer on this but I'd personally think 'no'.

This is considering the number of athletes who use AAS, where cardiovascular fitness is a large proportion of their performance and yet deaths from myocardial infarction related to AAS use are all but scarce...
 
RoadBlocK said:
Since the "contest" is closed, I have kinda a weird question you may or may not want to field. What benefits could an older person expect from taking test on a hormone replacement type program, ie: TRT, without any resistance or weight training program? Other than feeling better, libido, etc, would there be effects like positive lbm changes, greater energy, fatloss, and prevention of further muscle wasting(in older males). Or would the latter benefits only come with weight training. This isnt a loaded question, and I believe I know the answers, but I wanted to see your opinion, as I believe Ive read once that prevention of muscle wasting was a goal of certain steroids(in non athletes).
Click to expand...

I think if you look at some of the articles out there, there are a few that show increases in skeletal muscle mass without weight training -- even in younger men.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top