Nolva along side Hdrol depression

[Slinjim]

I am in my 3rd week of Hdrol at 75mg per day and am noticing some depression with the main symptom being very low motivation. I was wondering if running a low dose of nolva along side of it to stimulate some natural test production would be beneficial?

[Swifto]

This is a tricky question...

Personally, I dont think Tamoxifen will 'boost' endogenous testosterone production (thats is noticable) on a compound that suppresses the HPTA, but I could be wrong.

When using androgens that shutdown the HPTA, such as Test, 19-Nor's, SERMs cannot reverse the negative feedback loop, but they may be able to encourage endo. T production when inhibitive androgens are used, via estrogen antagonism at the hypothalamus. I really dont know...

Give it a go.

I dont think you meant to ask such a tricky question!

[Lemonada8]

I dont think it would be noticeable in an anabolic way but could help with depression that's due to excess estrogen. Another possible idea is clomid, it has more test boosting properties than nolva however u would need to be careful it may Make it worse due to more aromatization...

[Swifto]

I dont think it would be noticeable in an anabolic way but could help with depression that's due to excess estrogen. Another possible idea is clomid, it has more test boosting properties than nolva however u would need to be careful it may Make it worse due to more aromatization...

Be careful lemon...

There are no comparable studies on Clomid/Tamox on serum T. The one comparable study on both SERMs, testing GnRH, LH and FSH, Tamoxifen came out on top.

[Lemonada8]

'
In a recent study done on Tamox , Tore and Rolax comparing HPTA restoration. Tamoxifen can out on top. In 8 weeks, 20mg/ED of Tamoxifen increased LH from 4.54 to 7.73 (+70%) and Test from 496.59 to 835.06 (+71%). After two months, 60mg/day of Toremifene increased LH from 4.05 to 5.05 (+25%) and Test from 496.59 to 709.79 (+42%).

One thing I will say though, is that the Tore dose is at 60mg/ED for 6-8 weeks, which IMHO is a low dose fo PCT . If you've read above? You'll see that I suggest a fair bit more (120/100/60/60/60) is what I suggest now. So although this study states Tamox is superoir to Tore, take the doses into account.

Again, even recent research on Tamox doesnt raise serum T by 146% as Clomid dose at 25mg/ED for 4-6 weeks"

isnt this from ur thread?

[Swifto]

'
In a recent study done on Tamox , Tore and Rolax comparing HPTA restoration. Tamoxifen can out on top. In 8 weeks, 20mg/ED of Tamoxifen increased LH from 4.54 to 7.73 (+70%) and Test from 496.59 to 835.06 (+71%). After two months, 60mg/day of Toremifene increased LH from 4.05 to 5.05 (+25%) and Test from 496.59 to 709.79 (+42%).

One thing I will say though, is that the Tore dose is at 60mg/ED for 6-8 weeks, which IMHO is a low dose fo PCT . If you've read above? You'll see that I suggest a fair bit more (120/100/60/60/60) is what I suggest now. So although this study states Tamox is superoir to Tore, take the doses into account.

Again, even recent research on Tamox doesnt raise serum T by 146% as Clomid dose at 25mg/ED for 4-6 weeks"

isnt this from ur thread?

The study was not done on the same individuals. Thats the mistake I made.

You cannot compare SERMs on two different populations, that suffer from hypogonaidsm and the other setting azoospermia or idiopathic oligozoospermia. The baseline levels to qualify for the studies alone will vary.

Comparing the final conclusion or outcome of two different studies, and then saying X is better than Y puts you on various precarious ground, because of the many variables each study has.

There is one comparable study on both Tamox/Clomid and Tamox showed better results, though, serum T was not tested.

[DAAS]

SO would it be wrong to say that a user may see many benefits from Clomid but not much from Nolva.

Ive ran both before and noticed much more testicular "rebound" from clomid, and almost no "rebound" on Nolva.

Also I plan on running tore and Nolva at low dose for 5-6 weeks, however Ive read that tore can raise shbg. Would 25mg of Proviron reverse this or even 12.5mg? Id rather use less.

[Swifto]

SO would it be wrong to say that a user may see many benefits from Clomid but not much from Nolva.

Ive ran both before and noticed much more testicular "rebound" from clomid, and almost no "rebound" on Nolva.

Also I plan on running tore and Nolva at low dose for 5-6 weeks, however Ive read that tore can raise shbg. Would 25mg of Proviron reverse this or even 12.5mg? Id rather use less.

What data have you seen that Tore raises SHBG. SERMs raise SHBG because testosterone rises. I wouldnt worry about the SHBG rise.

Tamox/Tore is an excellent PCT and is what I use and suggest.

[Lemonada8]

Can u shoot me a link to that article?

and hypogonadism and oligozoospermia go hand in hand, depending on the root cause ( but if its LH problems then they are basically the same thing)... so with the difference in numbers with clomid being 2x tomax, i would still go with my original thoughts on the issue.

the only comparison i have found is in women where clomid therapy didnt work and then they tried tomax which had better results.

[DAAS]

oligozoospermia is probably the coolest looking word ever

[Slinjim]

From what I have read on this site people perfer clomid much more than nolva. That akes me want to use clomid this time around since I have never ran it.

Do clomid and nolva aromatize and the same rate because I am prone to gyno and don't have letro on hand?

[Swifto]

Can u shoot me a link to that article?

and hypogonadism and oligozoospermia go hand in hand, depending on the root cause ( but if its LH problems then they are basically the same thing)... so with the difference in numbers with clomid being 2x tomax, i would still go with my original thoughts on the issue.

the only comparison i have found is in women where clomid therapy didnt work and then they tried tomax which had better results.

Clomid, Nolvadex and testosterone Stimulation

By William Llewellyn

Editors Note: I am extremely pleased to have Bill Llewellyn contributing an article for us this week. For those who are unaware, he is the author of Anabolics 2000 and Anabolics 2002 and is one of the bodybuilding world's foremost experts on androgens and anabolics. He is also the President of Molecular Nutrition, one of the most ********** companies in this business. Along with Avant Labs and ErgoPharm, Molecular Nutrition is one of the few companies dedicated to putting forth only those products backed by legitimate research, rather than excessive hype and other such B.S. Two products, in particular, that deserve to be more well-known are Viritase, a potent anti-estrogen, and Boldione, a boldenone precursor. To find out more about these, and the rest of their products, I reccomend that you head over to their website -- but only after you have finsished reading big Mf'r and spent all of your money on our products, of course


Now, on to the article:




Introduction


I have received a lot of heat lately about my preference for Nolvadex over Clomid, which I hold for all purposes of use (in the bodybuilding world anyway); as an anti-estrogen, an HDL (good) cholesterol-supporting drug, and as a testosterone -stimulating compound. Most people use Nolvadex to combat gynecomastia over Clomid anyway, so that is an easy sell. And for cholesterol, well, most bodybuilders unfortunately pay little attention to this important issue, so by way of disinterest, another easy opinion to discuss. But when it comes to using Nolvadex for increasing endogenous testosterone release, bodybuilders just do not want to hear it. They only seem to want Clomid. I can only guess that this is based on a long rooted misunderstanding of the actions of the two drugs. In this article I would therefore like to discuss the specifics for these two agents, and explain clearly the usefulness of Nolvadex for the specific purpose of increasing testosterone production.





Clomid and Nolvadex


I am not sure how Clomid and Nolvadex became so separated in the minds of bodybuilders. They certainly should not be. Clomid and Nolvadex are both anti-estrogens belonging to the same group of triphenylethylene compounds. They are structurally related and specifically classified as selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) with mixed agonistic and antagonistic properties. This means that in certain tissues they can block the effects of estrogen, by altering the binding capacity of the receptor, while in others they can act as actual estrogens, activating the receptor. In men, both of these drugs act as anti-estrogens in their capacity to oppose the negative feedback of estrogens on the hypothalamus and stimulate the heightened release of GnRH (Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone). lh - leutenizing hormone - output by the pituitary will be increased as a result, which in turn can increase the level of testosterone by the testes. Both drugs do this, but for some reason bodybuilders persist in thinking that Clomid is the only drug good at stimulating testosterone. What you will find with a little investigation however is that not only is Nolvadex useful for the same purpose, it should actually be the preferred agent of the two.

Studies conducted in the late 1970's at the University of Ghent in Belgium make clear the advantages of using Nolvadex instead of Clomid for increasing testosterone levels (1). Here, researchers looked the effects of Nolvadex and Clomid on the endocrine profiles of normal men, as well as those suffering from low sperm counts (oligospermia). For our purposes, the results of these drugs on hormonally normal men are obviously the most relevant. What was found, just in the early parts of the study, was quite enlightening. Nolvadex, used for 10 days at a dosage of 20mg daily, increased serum testosterone levels to 142% of baseline, which was on par with the effect of 150mg of Clomid daily for the same duration (the testosterone increase was slightly, but not significantly, better for Clomid). We must remember though that this is the effect of three 50mg tablets of Clomid. With the price of both a 50mg Clomid and 20mg Nolvadex typically very similar, we are already seeing a cost vs. results discrepancy forming that strongly favors the Nolvadex side.


Pituitary Sensitivity to GnRH


But something more interesting is happening. Researchers were also conducting GnRH stimulation tests before and after various points of treatment with Nolvadex and Clomid, and the two drugs had markedly different results. These tests involved infusing patients with 100mcg of GnRH and measuring the output of pituitary lh - leutenizing hormone - in response. The focus of this test is to see how sensitive the pituitary is to Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone. The more sensitive the pituitary, the more lh - leutenizing hormone - will be released. The tests showed that after ten days of treatment with Nolvadex, pituitary sensitivity to GnRH increased slightly compared to pre-treated values. This is contrast to 10 days of treatment with 150mg Clomid, which was shown to consistently DECREASE pituitary sensitivity to GnRH (more lh - leutenizing hormone - was released before treatment). As the study with Nolvadex progresses to 6 weeks, pituitary sensitivity to GnRH was significantly higher than pre-treated or 10-day levels. At this point the same 20mg dosage was also raising testosterone and lh - leutenizing hormone - levels to an average of 183% and 172% of base values, respectively, which again is measurably higher than what was noted 10 days into therapy. Within 10 days of treatment Clomid is already exerting an effect that is causing the pituitary to become slightly desensitized to GnRH, while prolonged use of Nolvadex serves only to increase pituitary sensitivity to this hormone. That is not to say Clomid won't increase testosterone if taken for the same 6 week time period. Quite the opposite is true. But we are, however, noticing an advantage in Nolvadex.



The Estrogen Clomid


The above discrepancies are likely explained by differences in the estrogenic nature of the two compounds. The researchers' clearly support this theory when commenting in their paper, "The difference in response might be attributable to the weak intrinsic estrogenic effect of Clomid, which in this study manifested itself by an increase in transcortin and testosterone/estradiol-binding globulin [sex hormone binding globulin ] levels; this increase was not observed after Tamoxifen treatment". In reviewing other theories later in the paper, such as interference by increased androgen or estrogen levels, they persist in noting that increases in these hormones were similar with both drug treatments, and state that," …a role of the intrinsic estrogenic activity of Clomid which is practically absent in Tamoxifen seems the most probable explanation".

Although these two are related anti-estrogens, they appear to act very differently at different sites of action. Nolvadex seems to be strongly anti-estrogenic at both the hypothalamus and pituitary, which is in contrast to Clomid, which although a strong anti-estrogen at the hypothalamus, seems to exhibit weak estrogenic activity at the pituitary. To find further support for this we can look at an in-vitro animal study published in the American Journal of Physiology in February 1981 (2). This paper looks at the effects of Clomid and Nolvadex on the GnRH stimulated release of lh - leutenizing hormone - from cultured rat pituitary cells. In this paper, it was noted that incubating cells with Clomid had a direct estrogenic effect on cultured pituitary cell sensitivity, exerting a weaker but still significant effect compared to estradiol. Nolvadex on the other hand did not have any significant effect on lh - leutenizing hormone - response. Furthermore it mildly blocked the effects of estrogen when both were incubated in the same culture.



Conclusion


To summarize the above research succinctly, Nolvadex is the more purely anti-estrogenic of the two drugs, at least where the hpta - hypothalamic-pituitary-testicular axis - (Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Testicular Axis) is concerned. This fact enables Nolvadex to offer the male bodybuilder certain advantages over Clomid. This is especially true at times when we are looking to restore a balanced hpta - hypothalamic-pituitary-testicular axis - , and would not want to desensitize the pituitary to GnRH. This could perhaps slow recovery to some extent, as the pituitary would require higher amounts of hypothalamic GnRH in the presence of Clomid in order to get the same level of lh - leutenizing hormone - stimulation.

Nolvadex also seems preferred from long-term use, for those who find anti-estrogens effective enough at raising testosterone levels to warrant using as anabolics. Here Nolvadex would seem to provide a better and more stable increase in testosterone levels, and likely will offer a similar or greater effect than Clomid for considerably less money. The potential rise in sex hormone binding globulin levels with Clomid, supported by other research (3), is also cause for concern, as this might work to allow for comparably less free active testosterone compared to Nolvadex as well. Ultimately both drugs are effective anti-estrogens for the prevention of gynecomastia and elevation of endogenous testosterone, however the above research provides enough evidence for me to choose Nolvadex every time.

In next month's follow-up article I will be discussing the role anti-estrogens play in post-cycle testosterone recovery. Most specifically, I will be detailing what a proper post-cycle ancillary drug program looks like, and explain why anti-estrogens alone are not effective during this window of time.


References:

1. Hormonal effects of an antiestrogen, Tamoxifen, in normal and oligospermic men. Vermeulen, Comhaire. Fertil and Steril 29 (1978) 320-7

2. Disparate effect of Clomiphene and Tamoxifen on pituitary gonadotropin release in vitro. Adashi EY, Hsueh AJ, Bambino TH, Yen SS. Am J Physiol 1981 Feb;240(2):E125-30

3. The effect of Clomiphene citrate on sex hormone binding globulin in normospermic and oligozoospermic men. Adamopoulos, Kapolla et al. Int J Androl 4 (1981) 639-45

[Swifto]

Can u shoot me a link to that article?

and hypogonadism and oligozoospermia go hand in hand, depending on the root cause ( but if its LH problems then they are basically the same thing)... so with the difference in numbers with clomid being 2x tomax, i would still go with my original thoughts on the issue.

the only comparison i have found is in women where clomid therapy didnt work and then they tried tomax which had better results.

I cant rember the numbers, but to qualify for the Clomid study, baseline levels had to be something like under 400ng/dl. The Tamoxifen study they were far lower at 250ng/dl. These are approx. numbers from memory. If you want me to find the exact values, I can?

They do not go hand in hand. There are too many variables when comparing studies like this. One population differs from another, age, body fat levels, activity levels, pre-baseline levels, dose of SERMs, duration, etc...

There is one study comparing both in a controlled setting and its referenced above by WL. Thats the most solid bit of information we have on the comparision of Tamox/Clomid.

[DAAS]

I cant rember the numbers, but to qualify for the Clomid study, baseline levels had to be something like under 400ng/dl. The Tamoxifen study they were far lower at 250ng/dl. These are approx. numbers from memory. If you want me to find the exact values, I can?

They do not go hand in hand. There are too many variables when comparing studies like this. One population differs from another, age, body fat levels, activity levels, pre-baseline levels, dose of SERMs, duration, etc...

There is one study comparing both in a controlled setting and its referenced above by WL. Thats the most solid bit of information we have on the comparision of Tamox/Clomid.

are there any specific reasons why some one would try tore, when clomid and Nolva are tried and true methods? I got it with my nolva simply because i saw a pct thread ( might have been yours) and it recommended tore and nolva, combined.

AND why is he refering to them as anti-estrogen in the article??

[Lemonada8]

Well lets take those numbers as they were. If clomid baseline numbers were sub 400 (higher than tamox) and it still raised it by over 2x the amount nolva did; you can still derive the conclusion that clomid raised it higher than tamox due to the numbers wouldnt have to be raised as high to reach the same percentage.

and one issue i have is with the fact that tamox increases pit sensitivity, and clomid decreases it. but they were infusing the patients with synthetic GnRH (100mcg). This isnt supplied by the body in this case, but is rather an experiement of how tamox makes ur pit more sensitive to the GnRH more than the clomid (which decreases sensitivity). this is something known already, but in that short of a time the clomid still raises test/LH without the need for exogenous GnRH. So yea its a decent comparision, but its comparing the actions it has on LH response, not on LH surge. thats why i say at least use clomid for 2 weeks, even if its a low dose it will help boost production before extreme de-sensitization can occur, and with a continued use of Tamox you can avoid it and still recover.

Also, if clomid didnt help produce test and spermatogensis, then it wouldnt be a first line pill for afertile men, tamox would be. But tamox is more for estrogen related issues (gyno) because of how it doesnt have the same stimulatory effect as clomid.

[Ashop]

I am in my 3rd week of Hdrol at 75mg per day and am noticing some depression with the main symptom being very low motivation. I was wondering if running a low dose of nolva along side of it to stimulate some natural test production would be beneficial?

I would suggest next timing running some testosterone along side the HDROL.
At this point I would just come off the HDROL and do a PCT.