Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 81
  1. #1
    BASK8KACE is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    2,396

    Low dose cycles--Truth and myth.

    If you've read some of my posts, you probably already have seen that I advocate suggesting low doses for beginners (being one myself). Why jump into 600mg per week of test as a first or second cycle when it is highly likely you will get great gains using 200-300mg (in initial cycles)?

    I keep seeing people write that 200mg of testosterone per week does nothing more than shut down a man's natural test production and bring him near "normal levels"--this is not quite correct. This incorrect statement has endured probably because someone wrote down thier idea/theory of what happens in the body, it sounded good, and other people repeated it. But, it is not correct. (I explain why it is incorrect below).

    I was paranoid about side effects of testosterone on a normally functioning body, so I had my blood levels checked while on 200-250mg per week. The results of the tests indicated that the amount of testosterone in my blood was more than twice the high end of the normal range (The normal free testosterone range is 50.0-210.0 pg/ml*. My levels were found to be near 550 pg/ml). I also talked to my doctor and UPJOHN nurses a lot about using testosterone at these doses. Here's a brief bit of what I've learned from my doctor, the UPJOHN nursing staff (UPJOHN is the manufacturer of Depo-testosterone a.k.a Testosterone Cypionate ), and professional medical documents:

    *--NOTE: pg/ml is the correct unit notation.

    Using a long acting ester testosterone (CYP and ENAN) does not mimic the normally functioning male body's circadian rhythm (daily rise and fall of testosterone). Testosterone, in a normally functioning body, does not explode up to high levels then gradually fall over a 1-2 week period as it does when injecting a testosterone such as CYP or ENAN. On the contrary, the body produces a small amount each day which is far below 200mg (It's around 10mg). That small amount is concentrated at the beginning of the day and then falls low by the end of the day. This process repeats itself every day and by the end of two weeks, a normally functioning body produces approximately 140mg of testosterone (appx. 70mg per week).

    The use of long acting esters are in theory supposed to slowly release the testosterone over a two week period, but this is not quite what happens. To keep it simple, the delay of the esters actually allows large amounts of testosterone to build up--especially if you are taking 200mg every week as opposed to once every two weeks (biweekly) which is what the dose is supposed to be. (I'm simplifying here). Remember the "normally functioning" male produces only (appx.) 70mg per week (=140mg per two weeks). The dose doctors are recommended to perscribe is 200mg every 2 weeks (biweekly), but they tend to give 200mg every week.

    So, it is fallacious reasoning to compare the TOTAL amount of testosterone produced in daily spurts in a normally functioning body over a 2 week period to the same amount of testosterone injected in one shot at the beginning of a week and reshot every week (before the previous week's dose is used up). The latter case (injections once per week) results in an overlap and build up of dose which causes the levels of testosterone to be HIGHER than normal. (Remember the shots should actually be 200mg every TWO weeks--not every week). These excess levels of testosterone are sufficient to build lean body mass faster than the "normally functioning" male.

    In other words: addding up what the average male body produces per week then comparing that to the amount that is shot every week is like comparing apples to oranges. There is a whole diferent set of advantageous reactions happening in the body when it is given a full
    2-week load (200mg) at the beginning of a week as opposed to getting naturally occuring, small, daily spurts of appx 10mg over the same period of time (2 weeks).

    This is why a low dose cycle can yeild REASONABLE gains. Understand, I'm not talking mega-huge-fast gains. I'm talking noticably-faster-than-normal gains, which when coupled with a strict diet, sufficient rest and an excellent bodybuilding work ethic, can yeild large, solid gains (especially early in a person's cycle experience).
    Last edited by BASK8KACE; 08-22-2002 at 12:58 AM.

  2. #2
    Tank21's Avatar
    Tank21 is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    South Jersey
    Posts
    337
    nice post, very informative

  3. #3
    Rickson's Avatar
    Rickson is offline AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    5,163
    I agree with everything you said I am just not sure it is all that relavent to the low dose/high dose discussion. For one thing we are not trying to mimic the natural test function (unless you are talking about a bridge). As BB we are not trying to even use it as test replacement like normal people would. It is nice to see someone try to set the record straight about natural test production amounts because I have read some crazy things on that as well. I also won't argue that some people can gain well on lower dose cycles. For me it all comes down to risk to reward. I don't think the dangers of (example) 500 mgs in comparison to 250 mgs on a normal male are much greater. Some may experience some estrogen related sides but most won't at that dosage. I appreciate the post and the information but I don't think it really lends much credance to the argument. I think in the end the people in the low dose camp are going to say I can make gains on lower dosages why should I do more and the people in the higher dosage camps are going to say you can make better gains with this amount that is why you should do more. I'm not sure either is right or wrong.

    By the way bro if that is you in the avatar you are looking lean I may have to drag my but out of bed and do cardio tomorrow morning.

  4. #4
    BASK8KACE is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    2,396
    Originally posted by Rickson
    By the way bro if that is you in the avatar you are looking lean I may have to drag my but out of bed and do cardio tomorrow morning.
    LOL Thanks man. Yeah, my avatar is a pic of me.

    My main point is not about the normal body functions. My point is why a low dose cycle of testosterone can do much more than people think it can do. I brought up the normal body functions in order to show by comparison what 200-250mg shots per week can do.
    Last edited by BASK8KACE; 08-22-2002 at 01:17 AM.

  5. #5
    combolic is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    76
    Xelent post bask8case, very informative.

    Now... can someone give us the doctors point of view on higher dosed test cycle? (500 mg + + e/w)

  6. #6
    Jamisun's Avatar
    Jamisun is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    248
    exactly, good post. I am about to start my first cycle. I researched and researched, i read everything I could find on AAS and ancilliaries, how to cycle, how to recover, how to eat while on....I read a lot on the boards and asked a lot of questions. People always said to run a higher dose than I thought about. I became desensitized to dosage amounts. I then talked to my best friend, who has done 5 cycles. I has only run test and deca 1cc every four days for 6 weeks. He has seen awesome results. If I take 1/2cc twice a week of deca, and 1/2cc test enan I think I will blow the hell up. So, I am going to try it out. See how my body reacts. I feel like it is better to start with low doses to test the waters, especially if you will still see good gains.

  7. #7
    little-man-zane's Avatar
    little-man-zane is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    can
    Posts
    194
    The main thing i like to state everytime is everyone is different. If you noticed about the average natural test produced each week it's a very wide range. The deliemma on this board is alot of ppl here have already done many cycles and the receptors just don't react well to the low doses of test anymore.The reason most ppl reccomend the higher side of doses is that's what probably gave them or the majority results. But works for them may not work for you.

    I myself didn't start off big dosing on my first cycle so my receptors aren't as saturated. And probably have an easier time to recover from the previous cycle.This is IMO.

    As for newbie's coming to me and wanted information of cycles...i will not advocate to use of certain drugs over other...i am far from having enough experience to reccomend what you take...however i will advise that so start with a low to moderate dose and see how your body reacts.If it reacts well to low doses .. why up it...you won't gain that much more...and will save your system for your next cycle..so it will reak the benefits of the AAS you deciding on taking.

    Remember more is not always better...and most of the time would probably lead to adverse side-effects. With a low to moderate dose starting off..you will gain more than enough..however..the thing is that your diet has to be on..because your not taking the extra mg of whatever to compensate.

    Totally agree,

    This is why a low dose cycle can yeild REASONABLE gains. Understand, I'm not talking mega-huge-fast gains. I'm talking noticably-faster-than-normal gains, which when coupled with a strict diet, sufficient rest and an excellent bodybuilding work ethic, can yeild large, solid gains (especially early in a person's cycle experience).

  8. #8
    Jamisun's Avatar
    Jamisun is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    248
    little-man - frank zane is the man! I like you avatar

  9. #9
    testaprim's Avatar
    testaprim is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    196
    good info, very informative!

  10. #10
    iron4life79's Avatar
    iron4life79 is offline Retired Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    the vast wasteland
    Posts
    3,790
    a low dose cycle will yield reasonable gains(please define reasonable for me though).........for a short while. if what was posted here was "normal", then we would never have to raise the doses. i'll go along with this to a certain point, that being a first time cycler or even a novice cycler.....
    bask, you amaze me bro, if you look like that from all your 200mg /week cycles then you are a truly gifted bb'er. props to you bro, you have great genetics and an excellent work ethic........

    peace bb79
    Last edited by iron4life79; 08-22-2002 at 06:14 PM.

  11. #11
    BASK8KACE is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    2,396
    Originally posted by barbells79
    being a first time cycler or even a novice cycler.....
    bask, you amaze me bro, if you look like that from all your 200mg /week cycles then you are a truly gifted bb'er. props to you bro, you have great genetics and an excellent work ethic........

    peace bb79
    bb79,

    Thank you, man, for the compliment and for your input on this thread.

    I have only done one cycle. I used testosterone (200-250mg per week [I hit 300mg for one week]). My next cycle is going to be a stack of EQ and Test.
    Originally posted by barbells79
    (please define reasonable for me though)
    By reasonable, I mean 10-15 lbs* of non-water weight muscle in 10-12 weeks. As opposed to 20-25* in 10-12 weeks on high doses.

    *--NOTE: Of course this is while on a strict diet, adequate rest and, intense training.
    Last edited by BASK8KACE; 08-22-2002 at 06:33 PM.

  12. #12
    iron4life79's Avatar
    iron4life79 is offline Retired Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    the vast wasteland
    Posts
    3,790
    bask,
    youre truly a lucky man,
    and theres gonna be a lot of jealous bros roaming this board when they find out how little gear youve done. youre one of the few that might not need to up ANYTHING.
    i do want to say this though, keep in mind that everyone isnt as lucky as you bro, ok? you can advocate these low dose cycles to alot of newer bros that wont be very happy with their results when the cycle is over.
    i can only go by my own experiences. and like i said i started at 250mg of test as well, with little to show for it. im now running cycles in the 600-800mg/week range and getting fantastic results. so its definitely an individual thing. just something to keep in mind bro. im not flaming or trying to bring you down, this was a great post.
    good luck in your future endeavors bro, youre going far........

    peace bb79

  13. #13
    BASK8KACE is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    2,396
    barbells79,

    I understand and appreciate exactly what you're saying, man. I just wanted to give another side to dosing levels.

    When I first started reading the board, I was scared about side effects, and I was a bit taken back by the high amounts of AS people were taking.

    I'm trying to provide another view for those who are going through the same fears and beginning stages that I experienced when I first found this amazing board--full of info.

    Best to you!

  14. #14
    iron4life79's Avatar
    iron4life79 is offline Retired Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    the vast wasteland
    Posts
    3,790
    Originally posted by BASK8KACE
    barbells79,



    I'm trying to provide another view for those who are going through the same fears and beginning stages that I experienced when I first found this amazing board--full of info.

    Best to you!
    props to you for that also. thats what this board is for, and youre using this forum well..........


    peace bb79

  15. #15
    4plates's Avatar
    4plates is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    178
    Originally posted by Diesel
    bask,
    One question I have is about the 'normal male' test produced daily. What age group are they pulling this from? I ask because, as we all know, as we get older our bodies produce less test than it did when we were in our teens.
    That being said, if a 24 year old did 200 mg/wk test, his results would drastically differ from that of a 30 year old running only 200mg/wk.
    Logically speaking.

    D
    this is something to consider also,i keep forgetting that the age group varies drasticly on the board.being a man in my 30's and personal experience i dont get any results on low doses,i also think it depends on what body type you are,and your genetics.i have friends who are same age or a bit younger then me who respond better than i do to low amounts of gear.not 200 mgs but low.
    ive done a handful of cycles with diffrent typs of gear and i personally find the cycle with 2 or more products get better results.for example test only cycles give me good size but with an exagerated amount of bloat.i ran a test cyp 1st cycle @ 400 mg wk,i got pretty beefed from it but a few wks post cycle,after the water went out i wasnt happy with the 10 lbs i kept.next was a sustenon @500 mg wk and 400 mg deca ,i ran the cycle for 8 wks,my strenth was much better and kept 15 lbs of 23lbs.next was a prop tren winnt cycle where i ran it for 8 wks ,the strent gains were truely unbelievable and i felt unstopable.i got hard as nails but didnt see to much gain from it,my goal wasnt to get big ,it was to try to exchange bf% with lbm.which i did.
    my very first cycle which i wouldnt call a cycle was sustenon at 250 mg wk for 8 wks,the reason i dont count it as a cycle is because it did absolutly nothing for me!

  16. #16
    abstrack's Avatar
    abstrack is offline AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    7,358
    nice post!! i was asking before about a second cycle and told of my first one was only 250mg of sus for 10 weeks and i also ran 50mg/day of win. for 4 weeks. my gains were great i went from 135 to 170lbs then only lost 5lbs when i got off the cycle. i was told this so low of a cycle that probably it was a placebo more less than doing anything for me??? and it was more about my diet and training. i do admit i train hard and eat very well but once the sus kicked in my strength shot through the roof and my weight was packing on weekly, and for a reminder!! this was only 250mg of sus a week>

    all in all thanks for the reassurance!! great post!!!

  17. #17
    little-man-zane's Avatar
    little-man-zane is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    can
    Posts
    194
    Jamisun little-man - frank zane is the man! I like you avatar
    I love frank zane... i think he was one of the most pleasing BB's to look at...yeah he was a little light..but the guy had no frame to work with..and i totally admire what he achieved.

    About cycles...i have to agree with BASK8KACE on this one..when i first came here i was very fearful of the side effects of AAS (as every newbie should be).. but thought gains could only be achieved by taking the higher doses ..reccomended. After i decided to keep it simple with a sust250 cycle for 8 weeks..in which i put on 20 pounds and keep 16. I certainly don't look like BK... but i know my body reacts well to lower doses and if i try to raise my dose by too much ..the ba`d begin's to take over the good.

    I have to disagree with the concept of
    BTW, While 200mg/wk may render gains of 10-15 pounds to some, how many people do you know that only want 10-15 pounds out of a cycle? IMO it is a small percentage.
    Anyone that gain's 20-25 pounds usually losing alot due to water weight. I figure if you keep you cycles lighter and focus more on AAS's that render more keepable gains who care's if you don't gain 25 pounds. Let's say you gain 15 and keep all of it. A few cycles like these and i will end up with more keepable muscle mass than an other.

    But like i said everyone react's different. And it's up to the user to make an educated decision.

    Good luck bros

  18. #18
    BASK8KACE is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    2,396
    Originally posted by Diesel
    bask,
    One question I have is about the 'normal male' test produced daily. What age group are they pulling this from? I ask because, as we all know, as we get older our bodies produce less test than it did when we were in our teens.
    That being said, if a 24 year old did 200 mg/wk test, his results would drastically differ from that of a 30 year old running only 200mg/wk.
    Logically speaking.

    D
    The testosterone replacement is aimed at bringing males back to production levels of "normally functioning" males who are in thier early 20's (around 21-23)--before test levels begin declining due to age.

    So the averages talked about here are the averages of YOUNG "normally functioing" men.
    Originally posted by Diesel
    BTW, While 200mg/wk may render gains of 10-15 pounds to some, how many people do you know that only want 10-15 pounds out of a cycle? IMO it is a small percentage.
    little-man-zane,
    You saved me a few key strokes by responding to this quote already.

    Diesel,
    I agree with what little-man-zane already wrote about the above quote.
    Originally posted by Diesel
    BTW, what I meant was that not many people that I know would be happy with 10-15 pounds on a first cycle.
    Deisel,

    I want to make sure that I clarify what my original post was all about:

    One of the few reasons I started this thread was to tell people that reasonably good gains can be attained in 12 weeks on a low dose testosterone cycle, for beginners. Too many people were writing that 200-250mg per week does absolutely nothing--and that is not the case.

    If you look back at my orignial post on this thread, you'll see that I made the following clear statement: "I'm not talking about mega-huge-fast gains. I'm talking about noticably-faster-than-normal gains" (10-15lbs of lean muscle).

    I respect the guys that want to be monstorusly huge, but this thread was not about that--it was saying that lots can be done with low doses on initial cycles.

    There are people out there who want to use AS to look good faster than "normal", not necessarily to become huge.
    Last edited by BASK8KACE; 08-22-2002 at 09:09 PM.

  19. #19
    demetri's Avatar
    demetri is offline Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    546
    Awesome post. I agree with the low dose strategy.

    I think it's better to go with a little bit less than a little bit more. IMO you get diminishing returns and it becomes harder to maintain.

    I prefer to use small dosages of a couple of AS (V and Deca for example) and run them a little bit longer.

    I find that I keep most of my gains and the next cycle just pushes me farther.

  20. #20
    Lil D is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    106
    Great post Bask8kace! I agree with the low dose idea to test the water to see how the steroid will react with your body. Great info for newbies

  21. #21
    BASK8KACE is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    2,396
    Originally posted by Diesel
    bask8,

    Just to clarify, I in no way shape or form had any intentions of attempting to say your post is wrong. It is probably one of the best on low dose I have seen here because you backed it up with medical research. For that you have my utmost respect.

    After reading a couple of my posts from last night, it may have appeared I wasn't conveying what I was trying to say clearly.

    Like I said in my last post. Everyone is different. As long as you are happy, nothing else matters.

    D
    Thanks, Diesel.

    Honestly, I'm glad you responded to the post, 'cause it's good to be able to learn about/discuss your points of view.

    Your right, man, everyone is different--that's what makes it fun.

    Best to you!
    Last edited by BASK8KACE; 08-23-2002 at 12:33 PM.

  22. #22
    BASK8KACE is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    2,396
    Bump.

  23. #23
    scotttiger54's Avatar
    scotttiger54 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Dante's Inferno
    Posts
    1,885
    i think i've said somethin to the effect on this board and pretty much got put in my place, but all along i knew that what isaid was right and you just gave me the info i needed to say i told you so.....thanks bro
    ST54

  24. #24
    abstrack's Avatar
    abstrack is offline AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    7,358
    an old post but still a very good read. I have ran both high dosage cycles and low dosage cycles and from my experience I see no real big difference in the 2 except for my pocketbook.
    abstrack@protonmail.com

  25. #25
    TheJuicer is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    884
    I totally agree..I have ran high and low doses and there really isnt a diff in me....I like no more than 500-750mg. of Test Enth. a week and deca at 300-400mg. a week and Tren from 50-75mg a day...anavar at 20..yes 20 a day! I tried 40mg and nothing extra...not even in strength...the larger doses of a gram or a gram and a half are BS..IMO!...If your diet is poor or your sleep is poor or you just dont know how to train..no gram of TEST will help you..

  26. #26
    BASK8KACE is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    2,396
    Bump.

  27. #27
    EastCoaster's Avatar
    EastCoaster is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,456
    Good post and I totally agree. I strongly believe that beginners can have great cycles with low dosage.

    I gained 40lbs off my first cycle by running this

    1-10 250 Test E
    1-10 200 EQ

    I couldnt have been more happy with my results.

  28. #28
    Juddman's Avatar
    Juddman is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,972
    beauty post bask8kace
    Last edited by Juddman; 04-05-2005 at 06:22 PM.

  29. #29
    newbrew is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,342
    I ran 300mg Test E for the first 6 weeks and jumped up 12 pounds and increased my bench from 240'ish to 270 within this 6 week period.

    I have since upped the dose only because, well, I just did. But I was getting awesome results and would have continued to do so if you ask me.

  30. #30
    TomPlatz is offline New Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    13
    One of the best articles I've read

  31. #31
    hulkzer's Avatar
    hulkzer is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    balz deep in jessica alba
    Posts
    481
    Quote Originally Posted by EastCoaster
    Good post and I totally agree. I strongly believe that beginners can have great cycles with low dosage.

    I gained 40lbs off my first cycle by running this

    1-10 250 Test E
    1-10 200 EQ

    I couldnt have been more happy with my results.
    how many wks

  32. #32
    DEVLDOG's Avatar
    DEVLDOG is offline Retired VET
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    city of brotherly love
    Posts
    2,973
    Quote Originally Posted by BASK8KACE
    bb79,

    Thank you, man, for the compliment and for your input on this thread.

    I have only done one cycle. I used testosterone (200-250mg per week [I hit 300mg for one week]). My next cycle is going to be a stack of EQ and Test.

    By reasonable, I mean 10-15 lbs* of non-water weight muscle in 10-12 weeks. As opposed to 20-25* in 10-12 weeks on high doses.

    *--NOTE: Of course this is while on a strict diet, adequate rest and, intense training.
    hey bro...what is your body weight?? i have my own theories on dosages and for me at 290lbs..200-250mg/week is useless...it's more like 3-4g/week to maintain and grow.but like i always say..this is what i need to grow...someone 100lbs lighter would no doubt benefit off much less....the bigger you get the more you need...of everything..gear,cals,rest,training...

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    1,733
    Quote Originally Posted by DEVLDOG
    hey bro...what is your body weight?? i have my own theories on dosages and for me at 290lbs..200-250mg/week is useless...it's more like 3-4g/week to maintain and grow.but like i always say..this is what i need to grow...someone 100lbs lighter would no doubt benefit off much less....the bigger you get the more you need...of everything..gear,cals,rest,training...
    You are correct. He is roughly 100lbs lighter than you.

  34. #34
    Mr. Punisher is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    127
    This is why a low dose cycle can yeild REASONABLE gains. Understand, I'm not talking mega-huge-fast gains. I'm talking noticably-faster-than-normal gains, which when coupled with a strict diet, sufficient rest and an excellent bodybuilding work ethic, can yeild large, solid gains (especially early in a person's cycle experience).[/

    loved your post! just dony know where the word ethic applies to the subject!

  35. #35
    righton is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    land of the cottonheads(F
    Posts
    1,171
    Quote Originally Posted by DEVLDOG
    hey bro...what is your body weight?? i have my own theories on dosages and for me at 290lbs..200-250mg/week is useless...it's more like 3-4g/week to maintain and grow.but like i always say..this is what i need to grow...someone 100lbs lighter would no doubt benefit off much less....the bigger you get the more you need...of everything..gear,cals,rest,training...
    If it is your FIRST cycle, 250mg/wk is more than enough to grow! It doesn't matter how big you are. You can be 100 or 500lb's your bodys will produce only an average of 10mg's test/day!! All the freakish giants out there suffer from pituitary gland probs with excessive GH secreation, not test. Anybody doing a first cycle will benefit from 250mg/wk, and a well built(not fat!!) large person would also benefit from the same amount, maybe not as much( due to the extra receptors on the added muscle that could use more test to saturate them) but definately not "useless"!!

  36. #36
    DEVLDOG's Avatar
    DEVLDOG is offline Retired VET
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    city of brotherly love
    Posts
    2,973
    Quote Originally Posted by righton
    If it is your FIRST cycle, 250mg/wk is more than enough to grow! It doesn't matter how big you are. You can be 100 or 500lb's your bodys will produce only an average of 10mg's test/day!! All the freakish giants out there suffer from pituitary gland probs with excessive GH secreation, not test. Anybody doing a first cycle will benefit from 250mg/wk, and a well built(not fat!!) large person would also benefit from the same amount, maybe not as much( due to the extra receptors on the added muscle that could use more test to saturate them) but definately not "useless"!!
    read it again bro...I state for me its useless....while i dont disagree with some of what you say.i'd like to see something to back it up.sounds like mere speculation.

    I always state "this is what i need" ive been doing this for 17yrs now..i know what i need..i dont pretend to know the science behind it and will never post something without facts.
    so to you i ask...wheres your facts,or is this just your opinion,if so you really should state that.

  37. #37
    righton is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    land of the cottonheads(F
    Posts
    1,171
    Quote Originally Posted by DEVLDOG
    read it again bro...I state for me its useless....while i dont disagree with some of what you say.i'd like to see something to back it up.sounds like mere speculation.

    I always state "this is what i need" ive been doing this for 17yrs now..i know what i need..i dont pretend to know the science behind it and will never post something without facts.
    so to you i ask...wheres your facts,or is this just your opinion,if so you really should state that.
    Fine..it's not right for you but its not your first cycle is it?But ANYONE regardless of weight will benefit from a FIRST CYCLE of low dose AS!! Now ALL this is backed up by FACT in the NEJM!! Now anyone who says "show me this or show me that" has definitely not done their research into it! Now iv'e been on and off for the last 13yrs(i'm 41 btw) and been on for the last year and a half straight. Now none of what i'm saying is my opinion only, it also comes from my docs who were prescribing HRT before it was even called that! So if you want facts check out the NEJM or i'll even try to find the links for you!!

  38. #38
    righton is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    land of the cottonheads(F
    Posts
    1,171
    Also the topic was low dose for BEGINNERS, not someone who has alot of cycles under their belt. At this point in time 250mg/wk would'nt even give me a morning hard-on!! But on my first cycle that was more than enough to prevent me from rolling over in bed because of a permanant kick stand and i put on 25+lbs also!

  39. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    1,733
    Quote Originally Posted by DEVLDOG

    read it again bro...I state for me its useless....while i dont disagree with some of what you say.i'd like to see something to back it up.sounds like mere speculation.

    I always state "this is what i need" ive been doing this for 17yrs now..i know what i need..i dont pretend to know the science behind it and will never post something without facts.
    so to you i ask...wheres your facts,or is this just your opinion,if so you really should state that.
    Well, yeah, thats the bottom line...you know what works for you.

    You're around 75lbs+ bigger than me, and you may need those doses. I generally use less than a gram per week of AAS, but I am only 200lbs or so (9%bf). But I agree that most people need big doses for big gains.

  40. #40
    Natural1's Avatar
    Natural1 is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Fl
    Posts
    463
    good read BASK, thanks for the info.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •