Blast and cruise (is it smart)

**Tricepticon** · 10-19-2014, 12:06 AM

Is it actually safer and smarter to use this method? I want to start gear between 22-25 but the thought of staying on gear for the rest of my life consistently is pretty harsh. I'm the type that NEEDS progression. I couldn't imagine going on and off cycle and going from 180 to 220 back and forth. What are the pros and cons?

**Haydenz** · 10-19-2014, 12:14 AM

This is an easy question for me to answer.

its not.

**lovbyts** · 10-19-2014, 12:24 AM

In case you are still wondering after the above advice let me add my opinion. NO! not by any means is it safer. It's nothing but a one way ticket to HRT, HPTA damage and years of trying to recover.

It is good to keep reading and learning so when you are ready to cycle you will know the proper way to do it.

This is a really good place to start as well as reading most of the sticky post at the top of each forum.

The young and Steroids

**qscgugcsq** · 10-19-2014, 07:13 AM

IMO,
Its the most efficient way to do steroids .
Its certainly have health benefit because you dont yoyo with your natural level. And need less drug for the same results.

The only real danger with it is that you have to stay for life...
Which in itself, if done properly can enhanced your quality of life and longevity.
On the other hand can make your life miserable in many aspect.

If you plan stopping one day.
The answer is simple its no.
If you plan on never comming off then the answer would be or get followed by a competant doctor or know your shit. And I mean ****ing know your shit.
It will allow you to take an informed descision.

Im against cycling, cause I believe that if you are at a point where you want steroids then you are at a point where you are supose to train and be dedicated enought to do it for the rest of your life.
Its a long term commitment not a one night stand.

**marcus300** · 10-19-2014, 07:31 AM

Its not wise to stay on cycle when you first start taking steroids because you can make tremendous gains without risking serious health problems. Many do lose size and muscle tissue when they first start and that's because they didn't build a natural foundation and also many have no real idea how to train correctly and eat accordingly to maintain the new body weight and muscle tissue. It is common to hear from newbies that they think the answer is steroids when they first start training but I can honestly say it isn't, its diet and training what are the key areas what will give giving you gains.

I would wait till your around 25yrs old before shutting down your natural testosterone but in the mean time use this time to build a base and foundation and most of all increase your knowledge in diets and training routines because you may think your training and eating correctly but you wont be otherwise you'd be a lot heavier and have more size. Check out the workout and nutrition sections of this forum and post your diet and training routine and we can help you to build that base.

**fit2bOld** · 10-19-2014, 07:34 AM

Originally Posted by Tricepticon

Is it actually safer and smarter to use this method? I want to start gear between 22-25 but the thought of staying on gear for the rest of my life consistently is pretty harsh. I'm the type that NEEDS progression. I couldn't imagine going on and off cycle and going from 180 to 220 back and forth. What are the pros and cons?

If you think you will go back and forth between 180 and 220. You really have no clue.

**PistolPete33** · 10-19-2014, 08:29 AM

The sad reality is that 90% + of people that get into bodybuilding won't stick with it. So, even thouh it's such a big part of your life "right now" chances are in 4 years it will be a thing of the past. I've had a love/hate relationship with bodybuilding and lifting and I've transitioned over the years from Martial Arts to bodybuidling, to Martial Arts, to shooting, back to Martial Arts, and back to Bodybuilding etc. I've gotten big, then tried losing the weight, to gain it back, to leaning up, bulking up blah blah blah.

Life takes us on all different paths and doing something now that will give you a lifetime of injections isn't a good idea. I'm on TRT now and it's OK for my lifestyle because I'm back into lifting and bodybuilding but I know as time goes on and things change I will hate this lifestyle. instant gratification isn't always the best choice esp. when you're looking at possibly changing your entire lifestyle for the rest of your life.

**Tricepticon** · 10-19-2014, 09:21 AM

That may be the most ignorant comment I've ever seen. U mean to tell me that "I" couldn't go from 180 to 220 on a cycle? U must really have no clue lmao. Btw, I never said it'd be pure muscle mass like u assumed.

**PistolPete33** · 10-19-2014, 09:55 AM

You won't gain 40lbs. on a cycle. My first cycle I went from 185 to 205 and I was eating like a maniac. I also looked like total crap because I was so obsessed with the scale I didn't care how I looked so long as I was gaining. I gained a TON of fat to the point that people in my life were stepping in and saying I needed to slow down because I looked so bad. Lesson learned. A realistic goal is 5-8lbs. of muscle via a cycle. Doesn't sound like much but it is. Don't have unrealistic expectations.

**lovbyts** · 10-19-2014, 10:05 PM

Originally Posted by Tricepticon

That may be the most ignorant comment I've ever seen. U mean to tell me that "I" couldn't go from 180 to 220 on a cycle? U must really have no clue lmao. Btw, I never said it'd be pure muscle mass like u assumed.

Why would you want to gain any weight that is not muscle? You can do that without aas.

**Times Roman** · 10-19-2014, 10:12 PM

Originally Posted by Tricepticon

Is it actually safer and smarter to use this method? I want to start gear between 22-25 but the thought of staying on gear for the rest of my life consistently is pretty harsh. I'm the type that NEEDS progression. I couldn't imagine going on and off cycle and going from 180 to 220 back and forth. What are the pros and cons?

the reality is, you do NOT need steroids to be a body builder. Many here, self included, have spent a large part of their lifting lives natty. I was in my 40's when I was pushing 250 the first time.

Maybe you should first learn how to do it natty? that way, if/when you do decide to cycle, you can avoid the weight fluctuations?

**Times Roman** · 10-19-2014, 10:14 PM

Originally Posted by Tricepticon

That may be the most ignorant comment I've ever seen. U mean to tell me that "I" couldn't go from 180 to 220 on a cycle? U must really have no clue lmao. Btw, I never said it'd be pure muscle mass like u assumed.

mate
no need to get nasty. most here that have been around awhile have earned their stripes.

**itsjayman02** · 10-20-2014, 06:06 AM

Originally Posted by times roman

mate
no need to get nasty. Most here that have been around awhile have earned their stripes.

x2 !!

**zempey** · 10-20-2014, 06:29 AM

There is nothing ignorant about that comment, a 40lb fluctuation in weight is massive, the amount of steroids and food to do that on one cycle is beyond what most could comprehend. Unless you are planning on becoming a giant fat pig while on cycle and wasting the opportunity for proper growth while taking a chance with your health, then you wont gain anywhere near 40lbs. Ignorance is a lack of knowledge, I think you need to do some more reading on this forum before you start make comments like that.

**ScotchGuard02** · 10-20-2014, 11:06 AM

I can think of only one situations where cruise and blast might be acceptable. If you have low T and on TRT, I would consider that cruising. Doing a cycle on top of the cruising dose, I would call that blasting. Most BB cruise at my blast level and blast at levels I wouldn't even try. If you don't need TRT I would recommend that you don't cruise/blast. The down side is just as much as the up side and when you're young you really should avoid the down side.

**diesel101** · 10-20-2014, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by Tricepticon

That may be the most ignorant comment I've ever seen. U mean to tell me that "I" couldn't go from 180 to 220 on a cycle? U must really have no clue lmao. Btw, I never said it'd be pure muscle mass like u assumed.

I think most members will agree that you are the one that has no clue about running aas and the results from it.

**Lee_1978** · 10-20-2014, 03:33 PM

So what is the point of blast and cruise? What are the benefits for the experienced or pro?

**tectime** · 10-20-2014, 03:56 PM

If already on hrt like scotch said then it's fantastic for keeping the gains you get from your blasts. No pct, no juggling your levels around. You do usually have to change your ai dose but after a while and many blood tests you get to know how much you need for what you are running. The results and benefits would be the same if not on hrt but the fact would've that you are putting yourself on hrt and really after you are a certain age that's not a big deal but at a young age maybe not so cool. Not just years and years of pinning but 100s of 1000s of dollars of expense for the rest of your life. Do not just unhealthy for the younger you start but much much more expensive.

**zempey** · 10-20-2014, 04:08 PM

The only point I see is to have higher than normal levels constantly, cruise will be low dose maintenance, while blast will be high dose building. The experienced would possibly benefit from always having higher levels, possibly not having any natural production left, pros just need to be on all the time because they are shut down permanently. I considered a blast cruise cycle this coming winter, but opted to run a 8 week test only with 8 weeks off then 20 week heavy cycle followed by a long break, I might not do another cycle after that, just TRT in the future. It all comes down to health for me at this point, I do want to do the heavy cycle just to see where I can take my physic one last time doing it right.