Anabolics
Search More Than 6,000,000 Posts
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 63
  1. #1
    hammerhead's Avatar
    hammerhead is offline Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    North Atlantic
    Posts
    567

    A study of Androstenedione - all you pro-hormoners need to read this!

    Here's some data on a study of Androstenedione. The control group is given placebo. The active subjects were given 100mg Androstenedione (AD) three times daily.


    After subjects took 100 mg of AD, testosterone levels at nine points between 1 and 5 hours were observed to increase about 20% (value estimated from their graph) compared to baseline and the 30 minute measurement. When the levels of the AD group are compared to the placebo group, the AD group is seen to have started with levels about 20% lower than the placebo group, and then between 1 and 5 hours, for nine consecutive measurements, levels are in every case higher than the placebo group, usually about 10% higher.

    In the longer-term study (8 weeks) the AD group suffered no decreases in LH or FSH.

    The AD group suffered no adverse physical effects.

    No adverse changes in markers of liver function were seen from AD.

    A fairly small worsening (decrease) of HDL cholesterol from an average 1.09 mmol/L to an average 0.96 mmol/L was seen in the AD group.

    In 6 weeks of AD usage, the AD group lost almost 5 lb. of fat on average without dieting while the placebo group lost less than 2 lb. of fat, again without dieting.

    The AD group increased strength by an average of 30% over 8 weeks while the placebo group increased strength by an average of about 31%. The two groups had similar increases in size of muscle fibers and changes in body circumferences.

    Both groups gained about 6 lb. of lean mass on average. The AD group made the same gain in lean mass as the placebo group while losing 3 lb. more fat.

    In the longer-term study of 8 weeks, increases in levels of estradiol and estrone in the AD group were about 30-40% compared to their baseline values.


    This study suggests that AD and all the other pro-hormones may actually be useful when dieting to lose fat. The 10% to 30% increase in testosterone isn't enough to build any appreciable amount of muscle. The 30% increase in estradiol is enough to cause fluid retention which can explain much of the weight gain people experience on the stuff. The excess fluids can also contribute some temporary strength gains too.

    In this pic is $60 worth of Androstenedione and $60 worth of Sustenon (if you paid the maximum gym price). I could post a poll and let you guys vote on which you'd prefer but that would be an asshole way of making a point - i'd be preaching to the choir anyway. But look at it this way - 56 capsules of AD 400mg - about 5% converts to testosterone so that's equivalently 20mg per capsule times 56 = 1120 mg of testosterone versus only 1000mg in the Sustenon. Hmm. (i'm sticking to the Sustenon).
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails A study of Androstenedione - all you pro-hormoners need to read this!-andro-test.jpg  

  2. #2
    BELLICOSE's Avatar
    BELLICOSE is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    tampa
    Posts
    299
    Now do the same study with prohormones that aren't ANCIENT.
    Try 4diol,1test, 1ad, 19nordiol

    Its common knowledge that androsteinedione is worthless

  3. #3
    iron4life79's Avatar
    iron4life79 is offline Retired Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    the vast wasteland
    Posts
    3,790
    Originally posted by BELLICOSE
    Now do the same study with prohormones that aren't ANCIENT.
    Try 4diol,1test, 1ad, 19nordiol

    Its common knowledge that androsteinedione is worthless

    hey bellicose,
    do you just intentionally try to piss people off, or is there a valid point somewhere in your last post?
    hammerhead can defend himself, but im getting really tired of you posting on other peoples thread with only negative comments.

    most of the bros here know me, and im extremely easygoing, but bro, i gotta tell ya, youre even getting to me.... lay off and dont post unless you can add something decent to the thread.
    all hammerhead is trying to do is help some good brothers out, as a lot of people still use those supps you call "ancient".
    why dont you throw a study or 2 up there on the supps you mentioned, instead of slamming h.h. for what he's doing? add something POSITIVE.

    peace bb79

  4. #4
    hammerhead's Avatar
    hammerhead is offline Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    North Atlantic
    Posts
    567
    For those of you who appreciate information here's an article on the pro-hormone product line that addresses the products mentioned above:

    The modern hormone supplement market, as distinct from the older market for glandular products which were largely ineffective, may be considered to have started in 1996 when DHEA was introduced. This compound is both a prohormone of testosterone and estrogen, and is a hormone in its own right. However, it is rather useless for helping lifters add muscle.

    Shortly after the introduction of DHEA, Patrick Arnold introduced androstenedione, a prohormone of testosterone (and, unfortunately, also of estrone, which is an estrogen) to the world of bodybuilding. Prior to this the athletic use of this compound was little known. He followed this with introductions of androdiol, a direct prodrug only of testosterone not estrogen, and norandrodiol.

    The prohormones introduced by Patrick Arnold all are "4" compounds: we will discuss the meaning of this later. Others have since introduced some "5" compounds, which we shall also discuss further on. There are now at least five "andro" products on the market.

    It then has become rather difficult for the consumer to keep track of which product is which. Androstene? Androdiol? Norandrostene? What are they, and how do they differ? What benefits do they offer? What risks do they have?

    These products are very interesting to people who are hoping to gain muscle mass or strength. Generally, the andro supplements increase blood levels of testosterone . They also seem to increase sex drive for many users.

    On the other hand, these products have side effects that everyone should be aware of. Women in particular should know that use of any andro products can lead to unwanted side effects such as facial hair growth. These products are precursors of male sex hormones, and so women should at the least give the matter careful and informed thought before using them. Using doses anywhere near what is appropriate for males is likely to lead to some masculinization: for example, a lowering of the voice or an increase in facial hair. A problem is that women vary a great deal in susceptibility and so no particular number larger than zero can be given as a dosage that is safe for all women.

    All of the andro products are steroid molecules which are very similar to testosterone, the principal male sex hormone. When taken orally, they result in brief increases in blood testosterone levels .

    The norandro products, instead of being similar to testosterone, are similar to nortestosterone. This compound is also called nandrolone , and, interestingly, is a sex hormone found in certain animals including horses, but (contrary to claims by some) not in humans. This steroid is anabolic in humans, but in men often has the unfortunate effect of producing partial or complete impotence, which is reversed on cessation of use.

    The body has enzymes to convert steroids from one form to other similar forms. Testosterone has three features which may be changed by enzymes. When any of them are changed, a different steroid results. Enzymes often work two ways, though. As it happens, if an enzyme can convert testosterone to another andro, say to androstenedione, then it can also convert that steroid back to testosterone.

    Let’s start with androstenedione, often called simply androstene.

    This steroid is exactly the same as testosterone in every way but one. Where testosterone has a hydroxyl group in a certain position, androstene has a keto group. All the rest of the steroid is exactly the same. So the body can convert testosterone to androstene back and forth by using the enzyme that can make this change. This enzyme is called 17b -HSD and is present in the body in fairly large amounts.

    It would be illegal for a supplement retailer or distributor to sell testosterone capsules. But it is legal for them to sell androstene capsules.

    The androstene, when taken up into the body, can be and is converted to some extent to testosterone. The percentage that is actually converted to testosterone is fairly low. For a man, a dose of 100 mg might increase blood testosterone levels by 50% or less for a couple of hours. For a woman, the percentage increase would be much higher, since they are starting from much lower levels. (Women have only about 1/10 as much natural testosterone as men do.)

    Does this brief, fairly moderate increase in testosterone really help build muscle? The jury is out on that one. Many athletes feel androstene improves their workouts and like using it. Others have found the only noticeable effects to be undesired side effects, and therefore have been unhappy with this supplement. Most of those who claim excellent gains are very heavy users who take the supplements many times per day – however, such usage shuts down natural testosterone production which will then take some time to return to normal after stopping usage, even if the usage is only for a few weeks. This is something that preferably should be avoided.

    Androstene is the product that consumers are most familiar with, since it has been on the market the longest. But now we have 4-androstenediol (androdiol), 5-androstenediol (5-androdiol), norandrostenedione (norandrostene), and 4-norandrostenediol (norandrodiol). Keeping track of which is which and understanding the differences is not difficult if we remember the three ways that steroids can be interconverted with testosterone by enzymes. It then becomes easier to understand how these differ and why we might prefer one of them over others.

    We already mentioned the first way an enzyme can change one steroid into another. This was interchanging the keto that androstene has at the 17th position with a hydroxyl by 17b -HSD. Both of the diones (androstene and norandrostene) rely on this conversion. Both use this enzyme, and a small fraction of each is converted to testosterone or to nandrolone, respectively.

    The second way is interchanging the hydroxyl that a diol has at the 3rd position with the keto that testosterone has by another enzyme, 3b -HSD. Both of the diol products rely on this. So androdiol and norandrodiol both use this enzyme, and again, a small fraction is converted to testosterone or nandrolone, respectively.

    The third way involves changing bonds as well as groups. While testosterone has a double bond (a chemical bond between carbon atoms using two pairs of electrons rather than just one pair) between the 4- and 5- carbons, the 5- prohormones have their double bond between the 5- and 6- carbons. These, such as 5-androstenediol, can only be converted to testosterone if this bond is changed in the process. This is more complex, and requires 3b -HSD/5,4 isomerase. The net result though is the same thing: conversion to testosterone.

    Compared to DHEA, all of the andro products are more easily converted to testosterone. DHEA must first be converted to androstene before it can be further converted to testosterone. Generally, DHEA use does not result in significant increases in blood testosterone levels, even at 1600 mg/day. It can, however, result in increased local levels of testosterone in tissues where the conversion enzymes are plentiful. This includes the skin. For this reason, DHEA use, like andro use, can cause facial hair growth in women. But DHEA is more or less useless for building muscle. It may have other benefits for older individuals at doses such as 50 mg per day, however.

    Many enthusiastic users feel that taking andro products "just stimulates the body to produce more testosterone," and they feel that this is a good thing. But that is not what is happening. The enzymatic conversion of the supplements does not occur in the testes, and natural testosterone production is not increased. To repeat: these products do not increase natural testosterone production.

    Long term, heavy use of these products will decrease natural testosterone production. If blood levels of testosterone are kept artificially high by supplements, natural testosterone production will be reduced to compensate. However, if the andro products are used moderately, this may not occur. There is no scientific answer yet that shows just how much use is moderate. I have found that users who have followed my advice not to use these products in the evening or at night have not had problems in this area, while those that choose to use them in the evening do have problems. This is probably because there is a natural daily rhythm to testosterone levels and production. Levels fall off at night, which causes increased production of the hormone (LH) that causes the testes to produce more testosterone, which then causes levels to become high again by the next morning. As a result, higher testosterone levels during the day don’t result in much loss of production, but high levels at night result in the body producing less LH and therefore less natural testosterone.

    What about side effects? And how should one choose between these different products?

    The diol products result in higher testosterone levels for the same dose than the dione products – they seem to be about three times more effective. Since different enzymes are used for the diol and dione products, some people speculated that combining the two types of supplements could give the most results. However, since the diols work so much better, the answer probably simply is to take more diols.

    The 5-androstenediol product looks like a bad bet for men. It is not only an androgen but is also an estrogen, which suggests that this product may be more likely to cause gynecomastia (abnormal growth of breast tissue in men).

    Androstene itself is normally present in the blood in both men and women. It is thought to itself be inactive, or of very low activity, until converted to testosterone. But testosterone, when present in higher than normal levels for sustained periods of time, can have side effects. For men, these can include male pattern hair loss and prostate enlargement. If testosterone levels are raised, then some of this testosterone will, unfortunately, be converted to estrogen, and this can lead to gynecomastia. Androstene itself can also be directly converted to an estrogen. In fact, androstene is more easily converted to an estrogen than testosterone is. Therefore, one gets benefit from only the relatively small amount that converts to testosterone, but suffers side effects even from that which does not convert. Androstene is a particular culprit for causing gynecomastia.

    For women, increased testosterone levels, or increased levels of any androgen including nandrolone, can lead to an irreversible increase in facial hair, deepening of the voice, change in skin texture, and enlargement of the clitoris. Both sexes may experience acne or hypertension from these products.

    We don’t know if all of these side effects may be seen from occasional use of the andro products. However, acne and hair loss problems have been commonly reported. Men using androstene have also reported gynecomastia.

    The norandro products offer the potential of lessening these side effects, because they cannot be converted to testosterone. Instead, they are converted to nandrolone. This steroid is much less likely than testosterone to cause hair and skin problems. Also, norandrostene is less able than androstene to be converted to estrogen, so it may be less likely than androstene to lead to gynecomastia. For women that conversion is not a disadvantage, and the nor products offer the advantage of giving a better ratio of muscle-building effect to undesired side effects. Even so, for many women some virilization will result from any dose that is effective for building muscle.

    Therefore, the norandro products may be considered probably safer than the andro products. They have not been on the market long enough, though, for this to be certain. Norandrostene, though, has been reported by some users to interfere with erectile function, and norandrodiol may also have this problem.

    Which of these products is best?

    In my opinion, each of the diols is clearly superior to the corresponding dione: androdiol is better than androstene and norandrodiol is better than norandrostene. The diols are more effective and much less likely to cause gynecomastia, because the diols cannot be directly converted to estrogen. With the diols, conversion can occur only with that fraction that first converts to testosterone, which is much less than the full amount.

    For women, some users claim the diones appear comparably effective to the diols. This may be because women have higher levels of the necessary conversion enzyme for the diones. Women who wish to use these products might then consider either norandrodiol or norandrostene, while men should in my opinion favor androdiol or norandrodiol.

    But if the diols are better for men, then which of them is best for these users? I think the answer is: it depends. If one wants the most effect for the money, the clear answer is androdiol. If however, one wants the least effect on skin, hair, or prostate, norandrodiol is the better choice.

    How much to use? Opinions vary but my opinion is 300 mg at a time, no more than three times per day, with the last dose preferably no later than 4 or at the most 6 PM. A particularly good time to take androdiol is 1-2 hours before a workout, since this will cause testosterone levels to peak during the workout, which does make a noticeable difference in how one feels in the gym and how well one can perform. I think that an ideal pattern of usage would be to use for only two weeks at a time, then taking two to four weeks off before using the products again.

    Another method that would be acceptable would be to use andros for up to 8 weeks, then to take at least 4 weeks off, and resume only when confident that natural testosterone levels have been returned to normal for at least two weeks (this might require many weeks of waiting if the user does not follow the advice not to use these supplements in the evening.) This can be judged fairly well by sexual performance.

    Those who wish to obtain effects similar to say a weak AAS cycle, rather than simply an "edge" in their training, will have to use the products heavily, unfortunately. Personally I would consider pharmaceutical AAS to be the better route if legal and available. I am not sure that there is any way to get greatly increased gains relative to the natural state if testosterone levels are raised only half of each day, as is the case with a usage pattern designed to minimize inhibition. The products still have some benefit with conservative use, but gains will not be drug-like.

  5. #5
    Warrior's Avatar
    Warrior is offline AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    6'0"/248lbs
    Posts
    7,129
    I am with BELLICOSE on this one. It is common knowledge that Andro-dione produces crap. 1-AD, 4-diol, 19Nor-diol, and even 5-Diol are good precursors.

    Androstenedione

    • Testosterone Conversion: Moderate
    • DHT Metabolite Conversion: Yes
    • Estrogen Conversion or Estrogen Agonist: Yes
    • Anabolic Properties: Low

    4-AD

    • Testosterone Conversion: High
    • DHT Metabolite Conversion: No
    • Estrogen Conversion or Estrogen Agonist: No
    • Anabolic Properties: Very high

    5-AD

    • Testosterone Conversion: Low
    • DHT Metabolite Conversion: No
    • Estrogen Conversion or Estrogen Agonist: Yes
    • Anabolic Properties: High

    19-Norandrostenedione

    • Nortestosterone Conversion: Moderate
    • DHT Metabolite Conversion: No
    • Estrogen Conversion or Estrogen Agonist: Yes
    • Anabolic Properties: Low

    19-NOR-4-Androstenediol

    • Nortestosterone Conversion: High
    • DHT Metabolite Conversion: No
    • Estrogen Conversion or Estrogen Agonist: No
    • Anabolic Properties: Very high
    Last edited by Warrior; 10-20-2002 at 11:45 PM.

  6. #6
    Cruezer's Avatar
    Cruezer is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    78
    bellicose...you sir,are an asshole

  7. #7
    solid-d's Avatar
    solid-d is offline Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    994
    good read

  8. #8
    BELLICOSE's Avatar
    BELLICOSE is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    tampa
    Posts
    299
    Originally posted by barbells79



    hey bellicose,
    do you just intentionally try to piss people off, or is there a valid point somewhere in your last post?
    hammerhead can defend himself, but im getting really tired of you posting on other peoples thread with only negative comments.

    most of the bros here know me, and im extremely easygoing, but bro, i gotta tell ya, youre even getting to me.... lay off and dont post unless you can add something decent to the thread.
    all hammerhead is trying to do is help some good brothers out, as a lot of people still use those supps you call "ancient".
    why dont you throw a study or 2 up there on the supps you mentioned, instead of slamming h.h. for what he's doing? add something POSITIVE.

    peace bb79
    Hammerhead's "study" is the reason why people think that prohormones are worthless. When in fact, they are effective to an extent.
    Obviously i pissed you off, however i didn't mean to. I'm just tired of prohormones gettting a bad rap.

    Something positive? I gained and kept 8lbs from a 4 week cycle of 4diol, and 19nordiol. How's that for positve?

  9. #9
    hammerhead's Avatar
    hammerhead is offline Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    North Atlantic
    Posts
    567
    It's not my study. Don't shoot the messenger.

    I cannot find a study that shows where pro-hormones produce a steroid -like effect. Noone ever said they do nothing. Just that if you're expecting the type of effect you'd get from AAS you'll be disappointed.

    I think that once someone does steroids and your body and mind become adjusted to them then doing pro-hormones after that is a waste of time and money. They would seem like total crap compared to the real juice - which is why this board (of primarily AAS users) is so down on them. If you've never done steroids and you're young and genetically inclined to build muscle easily I bet pro-hormones do make a difference. That's why so many younger and less steroid-experienced users defend them like you do Bellicose.

    Has anyone ever done a cycle of AAS (the real stuff) and then gone back and did the pro-hormone stuff and been happy?

  10. #10
    Ex_banana-eater's Avatar
    Ex_banana-eater is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    95
    Androstenedione is ancient.. there is no need to discuss it anymore. People who take it are uneducated on the subject of prohormones. I have friends who have gained 20 lbs of lbm on 1-test cycles. 1-test has certainly proved itself. www.avantlabs.com www.1fast400.com

  11. #11
    Sigmund Froid is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    460
    Bellicose knows what he is talking about. Comparing androstenedione to the new generation of 4-AD, 1-AD, 1-test etc, is like comparing the original, primitive methyltestosterone to more modern formulations like sustanon .

  12. #12
    BELLICOSE's Avatar
    BELLICOSE is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    tampa
    Posts
    299
    Originally posted by hammerhead
    It's not my study. Don't shoot the messenger.

    I cannot find a study that shows where pro-hormones produce a steroid -like effect. Noone ever said they do nothing. Just that if you're expecting the type of effect you'd get from AAS you'll be disappointed.

    I think that once someone does steroids and your body and mind become adjusted to them then doing pro-hormones after that is a waste of time and money. They would seem like total crap compared to the real juice - which is why this board (of primarily AAS users) is so down on them. If you've never done steroids and you're young and genetically inclined to build muscle easily I bet pro-hormones do make a difference. That's why so many younger and less steroid-experienced users defend them like you do Bellicose.

    Has anyone ever done a cycle of AAS (the real stuff) and then gone back and did the pro-hormone stuff and been happy?
    I did the bigcat stack 8 weeks after my fina/dbol cycle and was very happy with the results.

    They are very useful and give good results, but you have to be educated.

    There probably won't be any recent studies on prohormones, that one was done back when people thought andro would have crazy side effects or cause "andro rage"(roid rage )

  13. #13
    iron4life79's Avatar
    iron4life79 is offline Retired Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    the vast wasteland
    Posts
    3,790
    i wasnt saying bellicose was wrong......i just dont understand why he brings good posts down.
    there are a lot of people who still use andro, and for that purpose i feel what h.h. posted was worthwhile.
    since the supps bel mentioned are now the "rage", i thought maybe he could add something positive study wise on these particular compounds, instead of just slamming the andro. im not saying i dont agree that andro is well down the line on the "pro-hormone" list.
    this thread has turned out better than i thought it would though, for that i'm pleased.

    peace bb79

  14. #14
    McBain is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    751
    Originally posted by barbells79



    hey bellicose,
    do you just intentionally try to piss people off, or is there a valid point somewhere in your last post?
    hammerhead can defend himself, but im getting really tired of you posting on other peoples thread with only negative comments.

    most of the bros here know me, and im extremely easygoing, but bro, i gotta tell ya, youre even getting to me.... lay off and dont post unless you can add something decent to the thread.
    all hammerhead is trying to do is help some good brothers out, as a lot of people still use those supps you call "ancient".
    why dont you throw a study or 2 up there on the supps you mentioned, instead of slamming h.h. for what he's doing? add something POSITIVE.

    peace bb79
    Thank you, I was waiting for someone to say something. I completely agree, I am surprised he hasn't been banned honestly.

  15. #15
    BELLICOSE's Avatar
    BELLICOSE is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    tampa
    Posts
    299
    Originally posted by McBain

    Thank you, I was waiting for someone to say something. I completely agree, I am surprised he hasn't been banned honestly.
    What is there about my first post that is so offensive? I wasn't flaming hammerhead, just speaking my mind.
    Ya'll need to chill.

  16. #16
    Warrior's Avatar
    Warrior is offline AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    6'0"/248lbs
    Posts
    7,129
    BELLICOSE - dude, how'd you get on the blotter brah?

  17. #17
    bronzebeefcake is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    277
    You fellas need to stop taking things so personal...For every study going one way theres another going the opposite...I myself used VPX's decavar/paradeca and although I probably wont be using prohormones again ,I happened to have liked the stuff...Call it placebo, call it whatever but if it works for you then great...

    Now with that said Im also not one to go getting all defensive when someone posts something like this...And say something like "Im tired of prohormones getting a bad rap"...What are you the prohormone poster child?

    This was and still is a good post/topic...Anything educational that can shed new light on some of our newer brothers is great...This way they can make their own decisions confidently...Theres no reason for anyone to get into a 'pissing contest' over it...

  18. #18
    Warrior's Avatar
    Warrior is offline AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    6'0"/248lbs
    Posts
    7,129
    It's all about discussion and edumacation...

  19. #19
    Pete235's Avatar
    Pete235 is offline Retired Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,289
    As far as prohormones go, I truly think they work because the user "believes" they will produce steroid like effects. It is a placebo effect. The brain tells the body where to go and the user in question trains harder and eats better because they feel that this "powerful" stack will do the job. Also, most of the guys who claim great gains from pro-hormones are in their late teens and early twenties...when natural test production is at it's highest (which is something we try to get across every friggin day), I don't think that is a coincidence. With the exception of advertisments, before and after testomonials and studies put forth by individuals with vested interest in how well these supps work, I have yet to see hard evidence that they are any thing more than this generations cybergenics, smilax, creatine or HMB...they are simply supplements. If they work for you, more power to you, but as I said before...I will stick with what I KNOW works.

  20. #20
    hammerhead's Avatar
    hammerhead is offline Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    North Atlantic
    Posts
    567
    Bronzebeefcake and Pete235 - great posts guys - I couldn't have said it better myself!

    One more point - the main point I made when I posted this thread - the point that everyone - especially everyone sounding in favor of pro-hormones missed - is this:

    I don't care whether pro-hormones work or not - why should I take them? Why would I pay just as much or even more for that stuff than steroids and do them instead of steroids? I haven't heard anyone claim they're stronger than steroids. They're definitely not cheaper. The only reason I can come up with for taking them is that you think you're too young for steroids but you'll be okay taking the pro-hormones. Either that or you don't know where to get steroids so you settle for what's available over-the-counter. Or do you take them just out of curiosity? What's some of the reasons for taking pro-hormones from those of you who do. I personally cannot think of a single reason to take them instead of steroids.

  21. #21
    Rickson's Avatar
    Rickson is offline AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    5,165
    Hammerhead you have hit my problem with Pro Hormones right on the head. Even if they do work which I don't think any do orally (but I do believe you can get a response by turning them into a nasal spray or injection) they don't work well enough to justify the expense. The amount needed to see anything would cost so much more than a good cycle it is just not worth it.

  22. #22
    fiz
    fiz is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    bay area
    Posts
    22
    andro sucks.. no one uses that anymore

    4-ad converts at 15% (rounded down) while andro converts at like 5-6%

    4-ad also doesn't chemically aromatize

    I've heard 1-ad and 1-test are good too, but I haven't done my homework on them like I have 4-ad

  23. #23
    hitmeoff's Avatar
    hitmeoff is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    399
    PH definitely work. As well as AAS? no. But they can work HUGE gains. Unfortunately, those HUGE gains will come along with a HUGE debt, and HUGE Zits.

    I did a 4-AD/Nor-Diol/1-AD/1,4 Andro cycle a while back ago, with CRAZY daily dosages (1000mg/1200mg/900mg/500mg). ANd let me tell you, after 3 weeks, no joke, I gained a good 15lbs. Now, alot of it was FAT, cause I got sooo damn soft (I still havent recovered from the fat I gained), no amount of Viratase (5-AA, or the PH equivalent of Provirion) helped. But I know a nice part of that was muscle, because I also gained a good deal of strength. But, nevertheless, PHs made me fat, people would say to me "Damn, you got fat"...and 1-AD especially made me DEAD tired...like SICK tired. I also had one of my worst break outs ever!

    Since then Ive discovered AAS. I ran my first cycle with Test/Deca /Fina/Dbol and WInny (no, didnt run Winny and Dbol together!!). And while I did put on a bit of fat, I gained a ton of muscle. The change in my body was so damn obvious, it felt great! Everyone was telling me how huge (not fat) I was looking, I felt great, not sickly tired. Though I also got a pretty mean lil break out, this time the sides were worth the gains (I failed to mention that I quit the PH cycle after 3 weeks because I couldnt justify myself feeling like such shit and breaking out like a mofo).

    So to sum it all up: Yes PHs work. To get any kind of noticible gain however you need to take huge doses. The higher the dose, the worse the sides will be. And when you compare sides vrs effectiveness, AAS is just a better bargain. In fact, I'll go so far as to say comparing the sides of AAS vrs the sides on a comparable amount of PHs, and Id say PHs still have the worst sides.

  24. #24
    m16a2 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    1,523
    hitmeoff, damn bro, your hardcore! how much do you weigh now?

  25. #25
    Sicilian30's Avatar
    Sicilian30 is offline Respected Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    There is no place like ho
    Posts
    3,690
    Speaking from my own experience. There is no substitue for AS. Otherwise, why wouldn't they be legal? IMO I think Pro Hormones have advantages, to the average person.
    I have done both, and both did what I expected. However AS where far superior IMO. I think Andro is sort of the middle of the road (so to speak) between taking suppliments and taking AS.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    wonderful world of oz,where juice is free,plentiful,sterile, and not toxic to the liver
    Posts
    720
    The weight gain found in ph can be explained bye risen estrogen levels which heighten water levels and water levels can explain small strength gains, case closed

  27. #27
    Ex_banana-eater's Avatar
    Ex_banana-eater is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    95
    Originally posted by st82hellnbak
    The weight gain found in ph can be explained bye risen estrogen levels which heighten water levels and water levels can explain small strength gains, case closed
    how do you explain the 20 pounds some users have gained from 1-test cycles? ( a pro-steroid that has a very , very low estrogen conversion rate.) or 1-ad in sufficient amounts for that matter.

  28. #28
    hammerhead's Avatar
    hammerhead is offline Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    North Atlantic
    Posts
    567
    Again the conversation comes back around to the same old shit - somebody says pro-hormones don't work somebody else says yes they do somebody else says no they don't nah nah nah nah nah

    Who gives a rats ass whether they work or not - how do you justify the cost? Are you telling me that i'll get more bang for my buck from 1-test and I should stop stocking sustenon?

    I will not go for the "less sides" thing either. There are AAS out there that have almost no sides and many that do not convert to estrogen. Hell, Primobolan tabs aren't very powerful when compared to other steroids but I bet it's on par with 1-test and the like pill for pill. It may be expensive as hell for steroids but it's still cheaper than pro-hormones. If I could buy them for the same cost as say - aspirin - they'd be worth it maybe ???

    Still - will somebody who takes pro-hormones please tell me why you take them instead of AAS? Is it because you think they're safer? Is it the legal thing?

  29. #29
    Ex_banana-eater's Avatar
    Ex_banana-eater is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    95
    go to the bodybuilding.com supplement boards... there are countless people saying that theyve gained alot of lean body mass with 1-test (some in 20 pound range if they did 8 week cycles) be it ONE, ONE+, or other methods like homebrews. I know a guy who is selling homebrews at 60$ per bottle. That is 50 days of being "on." You can also order bulk from China and make a homebrew for even cheaper than that. Need I say more?

  30. #30
    hammerhead's Avatar
    hammerhead is offline Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    North Atlantic
    Posts
    567
    So what you're telling me is that these products aren't as expensive as I think they are?

    I do not know dick about prohormones. I speak for most of the older AAS using community here. I'm not looking for people to try to prove to me that prohormones work. Educate us on the subject a little bit. For starters - I have this conception that the only people getting any gains on the products are no older than low twenties - in most cases teens - and at that age your endogenous testosterone levels are already high and your body is able to make alot of use from the elevated levels prohormones give you - even if it is only a 30% increase or so (as opposed to AAS which is in the 100% - 500% i believe ???). My conclusion is that what prohormones do for you it won't do for me (i'm 36). Second - the cost - most people aren't getting these things at a discount like you've described right? I cannot find a reason for taking prohormones instead of AAS.

    Will somebody who takes prohormones please educate us as to why you take them instead of AAS? Do not explain to me how much you gained on them or how much your buddy gained on them or how much the neighbors dog gained on them please tell me WHY you took them instead of AAS !!!

  31. #31
    sp9's Avatar
    sp9
    sp9 is offline MMA Competition Sentinel
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Land of milk and honey.
    Posts
    3,585
    Just my 2 cents...(I think this is a great discussion). I have been here a while now and while I know exaclty what a first cycle would look like for me at age 32 I number 1), don't have a place to get stuff and, number 2) don't want to do anything illegal that can be tested for (even though I want the results and believe it should be legal). Now I tried andro back when it was the rage with Mr. Mcguire and it sucked. Since then I have tried 1AD twice and have had great results. Not just in my mind either. When you are stuck at a certain weight and then you break through that weight on all lifts by 20-25% at the end of 6 weeks it is real. It works for me. Is it as good as AAS for results? I am sure no way. But I think we have a real alternative here that I can order over the counter. I think that over time If I can get to my goals through the use of something legal that is amazing. And yes I would like to go pump some real test into me for 11 or 13 weeks but for now I am happy and hope things will only improve on the legal side. Please have an open mind about the improvements on the PH side and that some of us are totally shocked by the results of this 1AD and 1 Test thing.

    Later Brothers!

    Oh and about the cost thing, I can run 1AD for 6 weeks at 600mgs per day with about 4 bottles, at $135 total which I consider insignificant at age 32 with a decent income.
    Last edited by scottp999; 10-27-2002 at 08:09 AM.

  32. #32
    hammerhead's Avatar
    hammerhead is offline Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    North Atlantic
    Posts
    567
    Thanks a million scottp - it's about time someone finally answered my question!

    It actually does give me some relief to think that there is a legal alternative to AAS out there that actually works. I wasn't at all aware of this 1-test and 4-androstenediol stuff. I've learned from this thread, which is why I posted this thread - was to learn - not to have "prohormones work you're an idiot" yelled at me from a dozen people.

    Anyone else? The question is "Why would I take prohormones instead of AAS?"

  33. #33
    demetri's Avatar
    demetri is offline Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    546
    Speaking from experience PH does not work as well as AS. I did get great results from PH though and that was when I was 27. I switched to AS because I got way more bang for my buck.

    I first did Andro and it sucked. Then Norandro and I got leaner, but not stronger. Then I started a stack with Norandro, Nordiol, and 4 AndroDiol and did that with 50 mg of winstrol EOD. I had been doing the winstrol already for a week, after two weeks of this stack I was up 20 lbs.

    At the time the cost of AS was two expensive for me, though the PH was not much better. The way I see it PH are steroids , just not as good as AS. They convert too fast, which can IMO lead to side effects.

    After my first andro cycle I came up with this thought "All the side effects of roids without the benefits". I was starting to get gyno from the andro so I tossed it.

    The only benefit that I can see to doing PH is that they are legal if you're an American. DHEA is illegal in Canada and PH (grey market and a wink, wink, nudge, nudge product here) are marked up like crazy. Fortunately AS possession is perfectly legal here. AS are also dirt cheap in Canada at the moment.

    I agree with Hammerhead that AS are a better value. I also agree with Bellicose that Nordiol works and works well.

    I consider the PH products steroids and wouldn't do them unless they were being added to an AS stack. You'll fail a drug test with them too so don't let the fact that they're on the shelf think you doing yourself any favours.

    Crap, I just looked out the window and it's snowing.

    d

  34. #34
    Ex_banana-eater's Avatar
    Ex_banana-eater is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    95
    quotes from bodybuilding.com:

    Originally posted by Vanmuscle
    I guess I should post my stats before and after the cycle too:

    Before:
    6'0"
    182lbs
    bf: haven't had it measured, but about 10-12%
    Chest: 41.5"
    Waist: 31.5"
    Upper Arms: 15.5"
    Calfs: 15"
    Quad: 23"

    After:
    6'0"
    192lbs
    bf: again, haven't measured, I'm guessing 10-11%
    Chest: 42"
    Waist: 31.25"
    Upper Arms: 16"
    Calves: 15.5"
    Quads: 24"

    So, gains have been good...

    Later,
    Van
    this guy was born in 1974, and wasnt a new trainer. he did a 14 DAY cycle, and gained ten lbs.

    Originally posted by TPRES
    I have finished day 13 of my one test/4ad cycle. I am using avant gel, and dosing 4 ad at 450mg/day and one test at 200mg/day. Thus far I am up 10 lbs. from 200 to 210. I have gained a pound a day on average for the last 7 days. Starting to see some pretty good water retention, but I am bulking so who cares. Strength has started to increase, but my recovery time has not improved yet. Funny thing is during my first two mini cycles my recovery time improved greatly, I attribute this to the modified gvt training style I am using. It just destroys the body, and it takes longer to heal. I am not counting cals but pretty consistent between 3500-4000. I have been getting 350-400 grams of protein a day, and sort of cycling carbs. On training days I do not limit carbs at all, then on non training days I make a conscious effort to limit my carbs by at least 100 grams. The idea is to help prevent excessive fat gain, and since I am an easy gainer this presents no problems. So far I am happy with the results, and I have no signs of any side effects. I hope to cruise on for 35 days. Well that is all for now.
    this guy has been training for a long time, and knows his stuff.^

    Originally posted by curt2go
    It seems that some people around still doubt the power of the homebrew. PLease this is not a fight thread just information for people seeking it.... PLease give your homebrew transdermal recipe and the results from using it in the past or present....Also just as a side note if you use a pump or spray....


    Here is mine...

    The recipe that I used was

    60%**
    28% IPM
    5% OA
    5%PG
    2% DMSO

    Here is the new one that I will use form now on though

    20%**
    25%IPP
    25%IPM
    10%OA
    10%PG
    10%DMSO

    This is what happend . 5 weeks ago I started taking select 300 90mg /day fo 2 weeks. Then when my 1-t and 4-ad came I mixed up some homebrew and now I am doing 200mg 1-t/day and 100mg 4-ad/day homebrew transdermal. I had some avant ph gel so I mixed it up with 10g 4-ad. I stopped taking the orals at that time and switched to transdermal. This would make a total of 500mg 4-ad/day....

    So far after 5.5 weeks I am up 15-16lbs.. My strength is going through the roof this week. It is awsome..No water weight a little gut bloating but thats expected form the 4-ad...

    I use a spray bottle..

    On the other hand my brother started 3.5 weeks ago he is doing the exact opposite as me what I have in homebrew he has in avant ph gel and vice versa. But the exact same dosages. He is up 17 lbs in 3.5 weeks. BUT he has upped his caloric intake about 2000 calories I have only upped mine by 300.... We are both hardgainers....

    So lets hear it guys...Inquiring minds want to know??????
    Evidence of TWO people gaining nearly twenty pounds in less than 6 weeks.^

    Originally posted by Scorpio
    My last homebrew cycle, about 6-7 weeks ago.

    wk1...204lbs
    I used a homebrew of 1-test and 4ad for my cycle which I ran just about 4 wks. I disolved 10gr of 1-test in 240ml....60% everclear...30% ipm....10% oa. So the first week I ran 1-test only @ 6ml 2x a day. The first week I gained 6lbs, seemed like mostly lean gain (visually). In this first week I noticed my joints were a bit dry (poping/snapping) and lazy as hell. So I decided to hit up 1fast for some 4ad to help combat these problems. No noticeable decrease in libido.

    wk2...210lbs......added 4ad
    I used the same formula for the 4ad mix, except I made it 50mg/ml or 6gr 4ad in 120 ml. I made a seperate mix of 4ad and started taking 4ml 1-test and 4ml 4ad(8ml) every 12 hrs. The 4ad really seemed to help with the problems mentioned above. On wk2 I remained the same weight through the week.

    wk3...215lbs
    I was really impressed with how much of a diff the 4ad made. Noticed some fat gain, but results were impressive. I wish i could post some pics, but don't have the equip here at work.

    All in all I was pleased with the results I got. I will be using zinc and trib for recovery and also starting creatine. I'll post my stats below.

    before---------------------------------after
    chest-44 1/2 -------------------------46
    bicep-15 1/2---------------------------16 1/2
    forearm-13 1/2------------------------13 3/4
    quad-23 1/2---------------------------24 1/2
    calf-15 1/2-----------------------------15 3/4 (stubborn)
    waist-36 1/2---------------------------37 1/2

    My 1-test mixed clear.......4ad mixed cloudy (white). Easy to apply, not to long to dry. I liked it and I'll use it again in the future.

    I used an oral syringe to draw the liquid from my container, then applied to skin. I found it to be very accurate.
    more evidence that 1-test works. i can understand why it is all the rage right now.

  35. #35
    Ex_banana-eater's Avatar
    Ex_banana-eater is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    95
    i could have got more but i dont need to. obviously this works just as good as testosterone , seeing that they gain up to 15 lbs in three weeks. and since 1-test does not convert to estrogen there are great possibilities for it since that reduces alot of side effects. if you need aromatisation, take 4-ad with it.

  36. #36
    hitmeoff's Avatar
    hitmeoff is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    399
    Ex_ though 1-Test does work, the sides, I found, were intolerable. The acne was worse than on Fina/Winny/Test!!! And the lethargy made me quit after 3 weeks. It was literally PAINFULL to be awake. Actually it was 1-AD which converts to 1-Test, but that my experiance with it. But yes, it does work. Along the lines of low dose primo.

    The only real reason I see to use PHs over AAS is: Legal and Social issues. Which im sure your aware of.

  37. #37
    Ex_banana-eater's Avatar
    Ex_banana-eater is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    95
    Originally posted by hitmeoff
    Ex_ though 1-Test does work, the sides, I found, were intolerable. The acne was worse than on Fina/Winny/Test!!! And the lethargy made me quit after 3 weeks. It was literally PAINFULL to be awake. Actually it was 1-AD which converts to 1-Test, but that my experiance with it. But yes, it does work. Along the lines of low dose primo.

    The only real reason I see to use PHs over AAS is: Legal and Social issues. Which im sure your aware of.
    why didn't you take 4-ad with it for estrogen aromatisation to counter the lethargy? it has been proven to work.

  38. #38
    hitmeoff's Avatar
    hitmeoff is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    399
    If you read my previous post, you would that in fact i did! I did some pretty big doses though. I was doing about 1000mg of 4-AD ED along with 900mg of 1-AD ED (not to mention Nor-Diol and 1,4 Andro) The reason I know 1-Test was the culprit was because it was the last drug I added, after a few weeks of being on just 4-AD and Nor-Diol

    I found 4-AD got me REAL fat. I even took Viratase (5-AA) to help the heavy aromatization of 4-AD, and didnt help much. Like I said, funny thing is, I didnt gain nearly as much fat when I did the Dbol /Deca /Test on my first cycle, and didnt break out on Fina/Winny (added to the stack I just mentioned) as I did while on the 1-AD.

    Im not saying they DONT work. I know first hand, that (factoring out price and sides), PHs are about as effective as any other legal supplement. But pure effectiveness isnt the end all be all of the issue, theres also side effect and price issues, and when you factor those in, then PHs loose thier luster. AAS are far more effective and cost about the same (if not less) and have the same sides (if not less). Creatine packs on a real punch and its dirt cheap with no real sides to speak of.

    Those are my $0.02

  39. #39
    Ex_banana-eater's Avatar
    Ex_banana-eater is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    95
    why kind of delivery system did you use, and what brand name?

  40. #40
    hitmeoff's Avatar
    hitmeoff is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    399
    for 1-AD? Oral, used oral for all of them. Used ErgoPharms 1-AD and NorDiol. AST's 4-Diol, Molecular Nutrition's Viratase and Higher Power's 1,4 Andro

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •