Originally Posted by einstein1905
I have no idea why this is so complicated for some.....I'm referring to the people that read and understand the studies themselves. It's very clear that clomid, on the short term (roughly pct duration) is far superior at eliciting increases in gonadotropins. there is another study that clearly shows clomid having a far greater affinity for hypothalamal ERs than nolva. Nolva, on the other hand, has a far greater affinity for breast ERs and is therefore much better for during a cycle. Nolva also is very estrogenic in bone and liver, thus greatly improving lipid profiles. Go to the pct forum and read the 1000+ threads that refute Llewellyn's article. Also, recently on EF, I made a comment about Llewellyn's article and how misleading and incorrect it was.....his response......he tried to downplay the fact that clomid does in fact increase gonadotropins much more efficiently than nolva by instead claiming the major bottleneck during pct is primary hypoganadism :rolleyes: (ummmmm, wasn't your article arguing how nolva was better than clomid?) If HCG is used appropriately, then the Leydig cells will be fully primed to respond to gonadotropins, so assuming that HCG is used appropriately, then we come back to nolva or clomid? Obviously, we'll choose that which most efficiently increases gonadotropins, clomid.
There is no debate. The only confusion comes when people fail to look at all the data available.