? about arimidex

[D3m3nt3d]

as far as anti-e's go ...everyone swears by arimidex cuz it blocks the production of estrogen..butttt...like its been said many time...some steroids need estrogen to be produced for best results..so why use something that completely blocks out the production?

[str82hellnback]

bump up please,im curious as too this one also

[D3m3nt3d]

bump

[jbrand]

Originally posted by D3m3nt3d
as far as anti-e's go ...everyone swears by arimidex cuz it blocks the production of estrogen..butttt...like its been said many time...some steroids need estrogen to be produced for best results..so why use something that completely blocks out the production?

The estrogen "spillover" is not mandated as far as gains go. It is hard to say to what extent gains are compromised, but in my own experience there has not been a significant difference with or without anti-aromatases. You are absolutely right though in the aspect that the estrogen produced directly correlates to gains. i advocate using an anti-aromatase in a proventive manner rather than first "whipping it out" when the signs of gyno appear simply due to my personal priorities. I don't want to take the risk of getting gyno, sobeit if a few pounds are being sacrificed, the greatest part of arimidex is that its dosage doesn't have to change as you up the testosterone . So perhaps you can award yourself an extra cc of test a week in return for neglecting estrogen spillover.

[D3m3nt3d]

thanx jbrand..im gonna bump for more opinions