Search More Than 6,000,000 Posts
Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    BrownBomber's Avatar
    BrownBomber is offline Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003

    No Need for Anti-E's?

    I read this recent article on another forum which was written by an EXTREMELY exp. AS consultant/user. I would really love to here ppl's opinion on this...


    The issue I wanted to raise however is another entirely, not directed at the benefits of estrogen, but rather the downside to using anti-estrogens, especially aromatase inhibitors. First of all, the immediate estrogenic risk is exaggerated to a great extent. A normal person will not experience gyno in doses of 750 mg of testosterone per week or less.

    So in most cases, people start taking aromatase inhibitors simply as a matter of precaution, not because they need them. This is a behavioural pattern I want to warn against. It has come to my attention that people using aromatase inhibitors often experience MORE problems after use then before. People coming off a cycle, and at a time when estrogen levels are extremely low even, they begin developing gyno.

    Or people who did not get gyno before, suddenly developing gyno when using a lower dose of product. Something I found quite odd. In the first case, I simply attributed it to there not being as much androgen, but that would hardly be the case in the second event. So I did some digging, and it appears that you are, in most cases, shooting yourself in the foot with the use of aromatase inhibitors.

    First of all, estrogen increases are not linear. Its not because you have a given amount of estrogen with the use of 500 mg of testosterone, that that means you will automatically have 50% more estrogen if you use 750 mg. Studies show that high estrogen levels will downregulate aromatase so less estrogen is formed. And secondly, it appears that low estrogen levels may upregulate the estrogen receptor, making you more sensitive to estrogenic effects when estrogen levels increase again.

    So whilst not needing estrogen control (except in very high doses) you are paying for an expensive and unneeded product, that only perpetuates the need of this same product, as it makes you more prone to estrogen related problems.

    Mind you, that does not mean there is no need for estrogen control at all. But I would advise against the use of aromatase inhibitors and in favour of selective estrogen receptor modulators (like Clomid and Nolvadex ). There is no way around these anyway, as they play a key role in post-cycle recovery, but also they do not lower estrogen levels and they still exhibit some activity at a number of receptors so they will not affect aromatase or the estrogen receptor to the same extent."

    On the contrary. I would also caution against unneeded estrogen control without the care of a physician who can check if your estrogen levels are still high enough to be within physiological range at least.

  2. #2
    J*U*icEd's Avatar
    J*U*icEd is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    LI, NY kidd!!
    A normal person will not experience gyno in doses of 750 mg of testosterone per week or less.

    thats a lie....i felt gyno symptons from 400mgs EQ a week

  3. #3
    Ammar's Avatar
    Ammar is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Bro, EQ isnt a test...

    I always believe in PCT. Its a must in every cycle that I will run in the future.

  4. #4
    Bruce willis's Avatar
    Bruce willis is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    so its bad to use liquidex?

  5. #5
    TheMudMan's Avatar
    TheMudMan is offline Retired~ AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    L-dex can have a negative effect on your lipid profile..... the nolva helps it out....... also using both covers all basees

  6. #6
    ripped4fsu's Avatar
    ripped4fsu is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    I'd like to get the Pheedno opinion...

  7. #7
    Pheedno is offline Respected Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Miller's Crossing
    ER upregualtion with an estrogen level decrease is something I'm not swallowing. I have never in my life seen a study supporting that, and I don't even see how that mechanism could manifest.

    I find SERMS to be beneficial for lipid control. I've seen a 10% improvment in my HDL with 10mg administration of Nolva which is the main reason I use it. I also include it with my AI as total inhibiton of estrogen is not possible; you will always see conversion even with an AI so using the SERM along side sort of acts as a back up to your AI.(*I might try using an AI by itself with the addition of policosinol to replace Nolva in efforts to improve lipids. If I can replace a prescription med with a natural dirivitive, then I'd rather have less drugs in the system, but I have a feeling it won't be as beneficial as the SERM)

    I use an AI for estrogenic sides, keeping gyno symptoms at bay, reducing edema(which in turn reduces blood pressure). Making sure not to use an AI that is inhibited by Nolva(such as femara)

    Estrogen is the enemy, plain and simple. I've seen many arguments on estrogens beneficial effects and IMO, those benefits are ahcieved with the minimal amount still existing with an AI and SERM administration

  8. #8
    BrownBomber's Avatar
    BrownBomber is offline Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    God you fckers are smart!!

    Thanks for the info!!

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