at 500 a wk do ineed anti-e

[cyclen]

i am taking 500mg a week of test and have been taking .5mg of liquidex everyday i have not put on any musclw weight. i heard on here that taking an anti-e on a low dose of test would hinder my gains is this true?

[gundam675]

lol, this is the classic question.

imho, dont take an estrogen block unless u get symptoms of gyno, like burning in the chest. estrogen actually causes water rentention and causes a massive increase in the storage of glycogen in muscles. the more glycogen, the better u perform at the gym and the more macronutrients that are avaliable for ur muscles to use to recover.

now, what test ester are u using ?
what week are u are ?

if its a long-acting test it takes 4 - 5 weeks to kick in !

imho, i would keep 100 nolva tabs on hand for post cycle and gyno and liquidex, but i wouldnt take it unless i totally need to.

[TheMudMan]

you are..... the liquidex...... no it will not hinder your gains

[Pheedno]

Take the anti-e. If your not gaining, it's because of another factor, not the ancillery.

[cyclen]

im on 7th week QV enanathate no gains .5mg liquidex everyday 3200 cals a day 398g protein 290g carbs 44g fat. batch number 005. what is going on here. i have everything in check and im not gaining shit. i will never buy QV again.

[Pheedno]

I'm using that batch right now with results bro.

Are you sure your diet is what you think it is

[abc 1]

you do not need anti-e's, i'm telling you. unless you have signs of gyno, you do not need them. they are not healthy to take and the dose your taking of liquidex is too much for 500mg test. if you want to use it, e3d at that dose is ok since arimidex has like a 50 hour half life.

how much do you weigh, height, age, and cycle experience. maybe i can help with your diet. if you want, pm me, i have extensive diet experience and i use a body consultant to fix my mistakes.

[TheMudMan]

you do not need anti-e's, i'm telling you. unless you have signs of gyno, you do not need them. they are not healthy to take and the dose your taking of liquidex is too much for 500mg test. if you want to use it, e3d at that dose is ok since arimidex has like a 50 hour half life.

how much do you weigh, height, age, and cycle experience. maybe i can help with your diet. if you want, pm me, i have extensive diet experience and i use a body consultant to fix my mistakes.

It's always safer to be proactive and use anti-e's then wait around for the symptoms to show up. I like using nolva because of it keeping the receptors free of estrogen rather than blocking/conversion of estrogen all together.

[simplyjakked]

i am not calling you a liar but how the hell are you getting in 398Grams of protein in a day. if your answer is shakes and drinks there is your first problem!

[abc 1]

it is better to be safe, i agree 110%, that's why i have a-dex and nolva on hand in case of signs, BUT anti-e's are not healthy nor are they safe to take just for the hell of it. i am very close to 2 competetive bb's who are currently on 1500mg test along with a good amount of other stuff and they will not take anti-e's until post cycle or if necessary (1 of them is a practicing chiropractor). they are between 230 and 240 off cycle with under 12% year round. the key they say is to bulk naturally and that will all but eliminate estrogen sides.

500mg of test does not warrant anti-e usage, post cycle yes, but if you want to gain some weight, the extra water in the muscle helps bolster strength, why stop the process where it starts?

[sp9]

On my first cycle right now of 500 mg test cyp. I didn't take any anti e's the first two weeks then got itching nipples, not sure if it was in my head but started taking 20mg nolva and .25mg liquidex and since then symptoms have gone away. I was very glad I had the stuff on hand. I think I wouldn't normally react that way to 500mg weekly but I am taking avodart which is keeping the test levels raised beyond normal because it can't barely convert to dht. At least have your stuff in hand in case you need it.

[TheMudMan]

the key they say is to bulk naturally and that will all but eliminate estrogen sides.

I'm not saying you're wrong but how does bulking naturally stop estrogen sides? If I take in more test than my body will use it will convert to estogen.

[Pheedno]

it is better to be safe, i agree 110%, that's why i have a-dex and nolva on hand in case of signs, BUT anti-e's are not healthy nor are they safe to take just for the hell of it. i am very close to 2 competetive bb's who are currently on 1500mg test along with a good amount of other stuff and they will not take anti-e's until post cycle or if necessary (1 of them is a practicing chiropractor). they are between 230 and 240 off cycle with under 12% year round. the key they say is to bulk naturally and that will all but eliminate estrogen sides.

500mg of test does not warrant anti-e usage, post cycle yes, but if you want to gain some weight, the extra water in the muscle helps bolster strength, why stop the process where it starts?

You are wrong, as it is such an individualistic scenario. One that won't get estrogenic sides from 500mg of test does not mean the man standing next to him won't.

First off, the only detrimental factor to using ancilleires is the change in your lipid profile that can occur. And Nolvadex being a SERM, does not have this effect.
Aromasin - being an inactivator does not have this effect.
Inhibitors such as L-dex/A-dex/Femara are the anti-e's to worry about that factor. And you can't judge this in general, it needs to be looked over through blood work.
Example- I get a bio-chem profile taken every 3wks when on cycle and my lipid panel is not substantially effected by anti-e meds.

Second, the benefits far outweigh the negaitves.
Not only do you releave proabibility of estrogenic side effects, but the beneficial aspects that ancilleries have on Edema and Blood pressure are worth the administration alone.

I love how people come on here saying they know pro's in order to get readers to believe what thier spewing. Can't you justify your reasoning with an explaination, rather then a declaration of knowing the "know-alls"

[gundam675]

i am not calling you a liar but how the hell are you getting in 398Grams of protein in a day. if your answer is shakes and drinks there is your first problem!

uhm 398 g of protein a day is childs play bro. u can easily get this with only one shake after ur workout (with around 80 g of protein)!

now as for his diet, i would say up to carbs to 500. simplyjackked is right about the shakes if u dont bump ur cabrs cause ur body will metabolize the whey shakes if u dont eat enough carbs. if u are taking in whey shakes, i would switch to casein. whey is only good 2 times of the day imho, otherwise i find that it only keeps protein synthesis up for an hour or so, especially while on EQ !

1. when u wake up
2. after a workout (the best time)

i hope this helps !

[gundam675]

I love how people come on here saying they know pro's in order to get readers to believe what thier spewing. Can't you justify your reasoning with an explaination, rather then a declaration of knowing the "know-alls"

i have to agree with pheedno on this one. but for one thing, imho i still wont take an anti-e without some sides, i think it is more so the mentality. plus, i am a health sciences student, and i did some research of my own. as i stated before, i found that estrogen actually causes more glycogen to be stored in the muscles. u will thus be stronger in the gym and have more macronutrients in ur muscles.

now, even without the glycogen, however, i dont know if anti-es would hinder gains, since it is the test that is increases the protein synthesis and nutrients are gona get picked up whether u like it or not. so i think its safe to say that it doenst block gains. but i belive it blocks strength to some extent.

also, it has been proven with anadrol , which produces large amounts of estrogen, that when an estrogen block is taken, less water is stored and strength does not increase as much ! depending on the user these circumstances might be desireable/undesierable. but for me, i keep nolva/liquidex on hand and only use it if needed.

good luck with ur decision !

[abc 1]

pheendo:

relax guy, i never said they were pro's, they compete at state level. don't make assumptions that i'm name dropping, i'm going from personal experience and experiences of those directly around me. i see people on all different doses, not using anti-e's. this supports the fact that not everyone needs them, so having them on hand is a great idea, but they aren't directly necessary.

i'm giving my experience and my opinion. don't try to play me out because my real world experience doesn't mesh with your science book. real world experience is valuable and he is entitled to hear what i have to say from my experiences. in my experience, anti-e's aren't necessary at such low doses but everyone is different, obviously he doesn't know and is making an assumption and it isn't wrong, that's not what i'm saying, but it isn't directly necessary.

mud man:
they said the diet is the key. because they are cutting and rarely eating maintenance calories (at most), they aren't gaining fat. when they come off, the calories drop alittle lower to acclimate to the metabolic slow down, and bam, no estro fat. they keep low cals for 12 weeks post post cycle recovery, and then bulk very clean and slow, gaining no more than 15 pounds or so when bulking. they have always been big though, i'm sure to get there for them isn't the same for many people, everybody is different. these guys are in the same weight range on and off, that isn't normal so they may be exceptions, but these scenarios are out there.

[gundam675]

i also have to agree with u abc, pheedno uses his fancy words to look good ! he is really smart though, but i know what u mean, he has gayed me with his shit before. i luv u pheedno !

[abc 1]

i also have to agree with u abc, pheedno uses his fancy words to look good ! he is really smart though, but i know what u mean, he has gayed me with his shit before. i luv u pheedno !

i have no doubt the guy is educated, but all the education in the world doesn't mean shit if it can't be applied. just because i said i know 2 competitive bb's (not big time guys, state guys) this computer geek jumps on me and tries to make me look bad.

hey computer geek, i mean pheendo, here's an example that might drive you crazy because your science book won't match with this situation. i did winstrol for 6 weeks and my lipid profile was shot to hell, my friend did 12 weeks (he is not a pro, not trying to back up my story with "know-alls") and his total cholesterol was 130, hdl of 40. now with the book knowledge we have, that should not be possible, because we all know how bad winstrol is for the lipid profile. well guess what computer geek, it happened. but the science books don't say that will happen. but it did. real world experiences occur all the time that your books can't always explain.

also, the weakest form of arguing/supporting your views is supporting any claim you make with a medical journal cut out, thinking this will win them an argument. anyone can find journal articles to support "their" views. it's really not that hard. i stopped buying into that shit a long time ago.

once someone like myself comes along and gives simple experiences as my facts, i get spoken down to. simply amazing, this is why this board went from top of the line to middle of the pack. people with zero personal skills trying to make other people look bad. all i was doing was trying to help a guy out with my opinion based on my experiences. i guess none of that matters when pheendo has his science book ready to go.

if this is the way this board is that is a sad state of affairs. open minded is a better way to be.

[twosocks40]

abc 1, there is no need to make personal attacks on pheedno or this board. No one was calling you names. Grow up man, what the fuck does it matter if you have a difference of opinion? I agree with pheedno that even mentioning that you "know" two BB's is completely irrelevant. You have the thinnest skin of anyone I've ever seen on this board. Take your whining and name calling shit somewhere else.

-B

[depdaddy]

i agree with pheedno..me at 230 react very quickly to 500mg test..acne everywhere ..puffy nipples..the works...started my cycle in may at 213lbs about 14-15% bf...now at 230 11% but taking 20mg Nolvadex q day...acne still bad but not much bloat anywhere

[sp9]

hey computer geek, i mean pheendo, here's an example that might drive you crazy because your science book won't match with this situation.

don't be such a prick, i'm giving my experience and my opinion.

Hey abc, there is no need for name calling of any kind here. Post your opinion then move on. If you want to debate someone then do it, don't call people names to try to support your argument. So what? Pheendo gave you a push to explain yourself, you brought this thread down to a lower level.

if this is the way this board is that is a sad state of affairs. open minded is a better way to be.

Everyone here is open minded but understand that vets and mods are very well respected here...This is the best board of its kind with a very helpful group of vets and mods, name calling ain't gonna get your point across to anyone.

Peace!

[Rickson]

There is absolutely no way to determine at what dosage any individual may need an anti-e. It is a very individual thing and can change over time. I personally know many BB's who take SERMS year around (Dan Duchaine first popularized this method) and have never known a true anti-e or inhibitor that hindered lean muscle gains (not counting water). My personal experience has been that I look better and have more solid gains while using Anti-E's during cycles. Many things can go wrong with a cycle and it is really hard to diagnose exactly what it is but I don't think the anti-e's are the cause.

Please keep personal attacks out of this or any thread. We are here to express opposing views and your argument becomes very weak when it is reduced to name calling.

[cyclen]

then my bottle is underdosed if its not the anti-e thats the only thing it can be going to go get blood work done to see if this is true.

[Billy_Bathgate]

I always run them. What gets me is that 90% of the people I see on the boards think that gyno is the only estrogen side to worry about....

Myself, edema and edema related blood pressure are my concern. The overall mood I am in while estrogen is high is also very undesirable. I dont feel myself and get moody. I also find acne to be more pronounced.

The first anti-defence in using anti-es is always the same. Your body needs some estrogen for glycogen .... The thing missing to that statement is this. Anti-es wont take your e2 levels to a superficial low level. They take them where they should be, or a little bit higher in most cases. Your not going to get 0 estrogen. Its just not going to happen, unless maybe you take an assinine amount of anti-estrogens.


With ari alone, I personally use 1mg per 500mg of test. Or .5mg ED with 10mg nolva ED with that same 500. I preffer having nolva in, for its SERM actions and cheapness.

[Pheedno]

Looks as if my comments have struck a cord leading to defense.


Mr. abc,

First you'll have to forgive my mistatment about your proclamation of the "competitors" you mentioned. My eyes have failed me more than once in reading regurgitation of others opinions.

As for your retort-
I find it rather tastless that you would reduce yourself to name calling instead of simply stating your reasons for the opinion(s) you have on the subject.
The manner in which I replied might have been percieved as harsh or inapropriate(allthough I do not interpret it this way), but I find that in some cases newer members to the AS community seem to latch onto information without an explanation. Whether your expeirenced or not, the statment -
" you do not need anti-e's, i'm telling you. unless you have signs of gyno, you do not need them. they are not healthy to take and the dose your taking of liquidex is too much for 500mg test."

-hardly explains the reasoning behind your opinion.

The strategy in which we administer AS and relative meds often differs from person to person. Their are many disagreements between several of the respected members here on this subject and I believe it is a good thing. It insures challenges to keep educating one antoher and offers different points of view which are needed; after all, a one sided view can only ultimately lead to a bias or slighted mind.

A difference in opinion of one who is "qualified" is a welcome realization to each others ego, but the manner in which you state it insures its not looked at as a facetious ramble.

So with that in mind, have pleasant stay here. I hope your contribution is a worthy one; I just ask that you attach an explaination to your opinions where one is due. This way the newer guys can get a detailed view of every option possible.

[abc 1]

pheedno, i did take your initial post as an attack on my integrity. any ill will from my response i withdraw and will take your advice and attach explanations for my reasoning. thanks for taking the time to fix an argument that was more miscommunication than actual arguing.

twosocks40:
your a joke and your post was pointless and THAT dribble isirrelevant.
the information about the 2 bb's i mentioned is relevant. here are 2 guys doing things alittle different and making awesome gains. when you hit 240 with under 10% bf i'll start listening to you. now tell me how my telling this guy about a situation that directly effects the topic on hand is irrelevant. next time mind your business, quite trying to get on me because you don't like the way i responded to another member who initially insulted me. or did you miss that?

i must be so immature to respond in the manner that i did, then have you turn around and do the same thing. can we say hypocrite? yeah, i think you can big guy. leave me alone, i'll post where ever i'd like. if computer geek is the extent of my name calling, you better get some thicker skin than too because that was the extent of my name calling. is that your argument? that i said computer geek. ok but the rest of the post was straight forward and made my point clearly. i'm not going to come here and kiss ass and blow people because i'm told that is what i have to do. i was called out and i responded. live with it and next time focus on posts directed towards you, jumping on the band wagon and trying to start a flaming war against me is pathetic.

[depdaddy]

this is better than a highschool cat fight

[RON]

First all this fighting back and forth has gone on far enough. Squash it all now. I think this is a good thread and I'd hate to lock it when you guys get out of control. Lets keep it to the topic of the thread and keep the personal attacks to PM's

abc, I'd like to see where you have gotten your info about anti-es being harmful. Are there any studies you could send me? I have found them very usefully in controlling estrogen related fat. I use them on every cycle and at times even when not on any steroids and have never had any problems with them. BTW don't judge info from the size of the guy giving it. I know a lot of people who are local competitors who don't know jack about steroids and still use no post cycle therapy even.

[abc 1]

go to elite, do a search on liquidex/arimidex , there are more than a few people whose lipid profiles were hit pretty good, one i clearly remember had a cholestrol of 400 total. do i really need to provide studies saying this compound effects lipid profiles in a negative manner when someone else is going to turn around and say their lipid profile was untouched? it's all individual, that was the point of me telling cyclen to see if he really needs any anti-e's at such a low dose. if you are into searching for meaningless studies to support your/my opinion, that is cool, but the studies are always manipulated to reach their hypothesis. i guarantee i can find more than a few studies supporting my statement that l-dex/a-dex does affect lipid profile, that is known. the extent of the effect is individual.

can you provide me with any studies saying long term anti-e usage in men is safe? it's relatively new the concept of using anti-e's. are there any studies stating the effects of long term estrogen restriction in men? i'm pretty sure the endocrine system was established with estrogen having a distinct role, whether the role is desired/undesired is not the point. can you provide me even 1 study saying long term anti-e use is safe in men? i'm sure there are a few out there. would you believe 4 or 5 studies done on a generalized population that you more than likely don't fall into? or better yet, would you accept results based on studies performed on other animals? i usually don't.

i listen to people on-line and off-line, if they have experience and can give a reason for trying something, i'll listen to their outcome. whether or not their decisions can be supported by medical journals doesn't effect me. do you realize it was on these boards where i was told to ignore my bad cholesterol reading because it is not a true glimpse of heart health. do you think i believed that?

[RON]

Nolva decrease serum cholesterol level about 10% and lipoprotein cholesterol around 15%. L-dex has actually been found to slightly increase serum cholesterol. Neither of which is dangerous to the normal human. Plus the effect is only temporary and your levels will return to normal within a few months.

BTW yes I have studies to back that.

I tend to believe what I've learned through people too. Billy_Bathgate up there is probably one of the most knowledgeable bro on this or most other boards IMO. So I think his opinion is very valid. Also if you go to elite you will find many well respected bro's like Huck finn advocating the use of anti-e's.

[toolman]

Ive said it before and will say it again, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. The only potential health risk I have ever read about Nolva is a rare ocular disease that will be noticed by blurring vision long before any damage is done. It does not hinder gains, unless you consider water bloat from estrogen an actual gain. Unlike some of the younger guys here that are happy to take advice from a guy at a gym, etc. I'll follow the real experienced guys like Mick Hart and a few or the vets/mods on here that all take them as well.