Eq/deca/var Cycle-just Injected

**oswaldosalcedo** · 10-08-2005, 06:06 PM

thanks for info.

**Property of Steroid.com** · 10-08-2005, 06:52 PM

Shit...thats right...I knew that, it was my slip....Tera looks more Asian...dammit...

**Two4the$$** · 10-08-2005, 08:05 PM

She DOES... Whats amazing to me is that Tera's Ta-tas actually look real most of the time. Hot DAYUM! I love that augmentation has lowered the value of naturally large breasted women. I'm a specialist in that regard... so removing a lot of the competition helps. :-)

**wolfyEVH** · 10-08-2005, 10:05 PM

Originally Posted by TrumanHW

She DOES... Whats amazing to me is that Tera's Ta-tas actually look real most of the time. Hot DAYUM! I love that augmentation has lowered the value of naturally large breasted women. I'm a specialist in that regard... so removing a lot of the competition helps. :-)

when she first started porn, her boobs were VERY real. and beautiful might i add

**dragon69** · 10-09-2005, 12:08 PM

truman I've already said that this is just simply physiology. I have no need to post studies you want when it's simple well established fact. Just look it up.
If you want studies do some research, I really don't have the time.

**stupidhippo** · 10-09-2005, 01:07 PM

its not just simple physiology and people have gotten maintainable gains with cycles that dont consist of test. Many of the effects of AAS are similar or equal to test on how the effect expresses. I particularily dont like that u argued that any gains made with AAS without test are only w´ater - ITS just not true! Even if it is oversimplifying but AAS mimic the action of testosterone . It says so in all physiology books..

**Two4the$$** · 10-09-2005, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by dragon69

truman I've already said that this is just simply physiology. I have no need to post studies you want when it's simple well established fact. Just look it up.
If you want studies do some research, I really don't have the time.

I'm sorry Dragon ... I don't respect your "authority" on this subject to the extent that SUPPORTIVE studies aren't required. If it coincided with everything I knew to be true ... or fit all the evidence I have seen ... it'd be one thing, but you said something that's not only been contradicted by my cursory research, but also conflicts with what many people here have observed.

By engaging in this discourse I assume you mean to provide opinions and supportive information when requested. If you had credentials that superceded those requirements... well, that'd be one thing. You simply don't And I (again) don't mean this offensively. It's just a fact.

The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.

This is a simple scientific axiom.

**Property of Steroid.com** · 10-09-2005, 01:33 PM

Originally Posted by dragon69

truman I've already said that this is just simply physiology. I have no need to post studies you want when it's simple well established fact. Just look it up.
If you want studies do some research, I really don't have the time.

Thats not really playing by the rules...."I'll make the claims, then you find the research supporting them." isn't really how it's usually done...

I still reference every claim I make with proper references, and never refuse to post or find studies...and I'll wager alot of people would just take my word on it.....but I post them anyway.

**Two4the$$** · 10-09-2005, 01:34 PM

Amen!

And that coming from an agnostic with slight Nihilistic tendencies is no mild statement!

**oswaldosalcedo** · 10-09-2005, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by stupidhippo

its not just simple physiology and people have gotten maintainable gains with cycles that dont consist of test. Many of the effects of AAS are similar or equal to test on how the effect expresses. I particularily dont like that u argued that any gains made with AAS without test are only w´ater - ITS just not true! Even if it is oversimplifying but AAS mimic the action of testosterone. It says so in all physiology books..

I AGREE !

**oswaldosalcedo** · 10-09-2005, 02:10 PM

[QUOTE=oswaldosalcedo]

test stimulates more igf than other aas
but i dissagre with:
Quote dragon69:
"So Test will help keep gains made and will give a more permanent increase in muscle size/density".

from metenolone or nandrolone muscle last more.
but losses come from hpta axis shut off.

QUOTE]

AGAIN.

**Property of Steroid.com** · 10-09-2005, 05:11 PM

I don't know...off the top of my head, I would suggest that test wasn't even close to being the most potent stimulator of IGF, considering the production pathways of hepatic IGF, I believe it to be well known that orals stimulate IGF production much more so then injectables....and Methyltest/TestUnd. aren't the two that rank highest. I believe, in fact, it may be Dianabol , that stimulates IGF the most (reasonable speculation).

**oswaldosalcedo** · 10-10-2005, 02:12 PM

he said nandrolone .
I neither specify nothing.

"orals stimulate IGF production much more so then injectables"
is correct.

anyway i think, dht derivatives.

hypothesis and conjectures(R)

**100%NATURAL-theGH** · 10-10-2005, 09:58 PM

wow.... nice argument ladies! haha.. im kidding... guess what... only a few days into my cycle and I had a little "trouble" last night... little bit of syldenaphil and I'm okay.... but **** that... 500mg/Test a week it is!

**dragon69** · 10-11-2005, 01:59 AM

Originally Posted by TrumanHW

I'm sorry Dragon ... I don't respect your "authority" on this subject to the extent that SUPPORTIVE studies aren't required. If it coincided with everything I knew to be true ... or fit all the evidence I have seen ... it'd be one thing, but you said something that's not only been contradicted by my cursory research, but also conflicts with what many people here have observed.

By engaging in this discourse I assume you mean to provide opinions and supportive information when requested. If you had credentials that superceded those requirements... well, that'd be one thing. You simply don't And I (again) don't mean this offensively. It's just a fact.

The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.

This is a simple scientific axiom.

Truman you seem to have the idea that I'm here cause I want to have you argue with me......I am not into arguements. I hate arguing more than anything else in the world.
It is for this reason that I'm considering ignoring all your messages, you just really want to argue and really I'm not interested.

As for peoples observations, you're talking 'joe blo's' not medical professionals. Hey, I can pick my nose and see if it comes out yellowish or more greenish, doesn't tell me why or what it is. So observations are merely only subjective.

You can think whatever you chose about test, it doesn't mean shit to me.

Don't you dare insult me again or take another stab at my credentials or I will report you, recommending that you be banned.

**Two4the$$** · 10-11-2005, 02:00 AM

Ha ha ha... Personally, as unfounded as my individual anecdotal information is... I prefer sildenafil over tadalafil...

I've bought both - but I have DEFINITELY noticed a stronger affect (for shorter duration, obviously) from viagra. It's just bomb. AND! What's REALLY weird, is that the two forms of cialis I've tried - one that was in an oilly solution (from a UGL that rhymes with A&W ...) was MUCH better than the watery version I've tried from a research chemist website... So, I can't say which is necessarily better for all... but, my heirarchy of preference is...

Viagra ...
Cialis in yellowish oil (PEG ?)
Cialis in watery solution ...

**100%NATURAL-theGH** · 10-11-2005, 02:03 AM

too thin for me bro.... but not too shabby

**Two4the$$** · 10-11-2005, 02:06 AM

Dragon, you crossed the line. Go ahead and ignore me. I said NOTHING rude, and made it a point to be polite in asking you to provide support to your theory. In fact, if you look around, you should be directing your comments to Anthony, Oswaldo, StupidHipo and me. Because NONE of us recognize you as an authority. So please, do me a favor and ignore me. You and I obviously disagree - and in spite my earnest attempts and politely requesting you supply SUPPORT to your position you take it as argumentative.

How about this - if you can get me banned over this thread, I PROMISE I will paypal you $20 for achieving success. You have my public word. Now do it!

**Two4the$$** · 10-11-2005, 02:08 AM

Yeah, she is a bit on the thin side... but actually, shes all muscle. If things went further I'd help her fatten up. lol. But WOW! Even at lower BF% than me, her real boobs are REAL nice! :-)

Natural ... what the hell did I say that was so offensive to Dragon??? lol

**stupidhippo** · 10-11-2005, 02:19 AM

congrats on the girl truman! Dragon : to say we are speculating on some subjective opinions is ignorant at least.

**Two4the$$** · 10-11-2005, 02:23 AM

Yeah dude, she's bangin by my standards ... I could get more detailed... but DAYUM!

Anyway, I'm not even trying to piss the guy off or argue with him - I just want to see where he's coming from ... what he's basing his position on. F*ck, I like the guy from other comments he's made and posts ... what not. But this is absurd. What is it about asking for references that makes me an a**hole???

**100%NATURAL-theGH** · 10-11-2005, 02:27 AM

I'm not sure but now that schools out for the summer maybe we could all just get along? haha... seriously though... it doesn't matter so just be happy you have your little lady to go home to....

**Two4the$$** · 10-11-2005, 02:29 AM

Sounds good to me...

So hows your hunger doing? Mine is off the friggin CHARTS! I can literally eat ALL day, I NEVER FEEL FULL! This is INSANE!!!!

**stupidhippo** · 10-11-2005, 02:31 AM

yup.. I think no1 so far been ass... If u would get banned for doin sumin like this it would be crazzy =).. not gonna happen! to me it seem he has misunderstood some points concerning physiology and biochemistry. or then he has his terminology badly mixed up. The fact is I dont argue about anything unless Im quite certain. Even then I at least try to keep an open mind. I for one dont like claims that we r all joe blos and not medical professionals. MOst of us aint medical professionals but some ppl here have far more extensive knowledge on AAS than 90 % of doctors. I should know since Im gonna be MD in 3.5 years and most of my professors are doctors... I dont claim to know that much but I have basic knowledge on biochemistry and physiology etc that IMO make me able to sometimes draw conclusions (ofcourse I can be wrong sometimes)mmm

**bignatt** · 10-11-2005, 05:15 AM

Dude that chick is nasty as hell

**Mesomorphyl** · 10-11-2005, 07:14 AM

Originally Posted by TrumanHW

And, speaking of sexual experiences - OMFG! HOTTEST GIRL IN A DAMNED long time was at my place tonight... and things are going well. Here's a couple of pictures of this UBER babe (with strong indications of mutual interest!)

Bro... Check for an adams apple, quick.

**dragon69** · 10-11-2005, 09:51 AM

Originally Posted by TrumanHW

1.Dragon, you crossed the line. Go ahead and ignore me. I said NOTHING rude,
2.NONE of us recognize you as an authority.
3.politely requesting you supply SUPPORT to your position you take it as argumentative.

1.I crosse the line? You said nothing rude? How about that 'snap your head back in' comment you made in my other thread that I pointed out to you as offensive or the one about my credentials.
http://forums.steroid.com/newreply.p...eply&p=2154989
then you laugh about it here saying 'what did I say' like I'm only refering to this thread. Yet you know what I'm talking about the whole time. Why don't you re-read some of those other threads and then maybe you will see how insulting you can be.
2.Your 'None of us' comment I really don't care about. Not my fault you want to be ignorant of those around you that spent the years learning WELL established information. Jeez this is what I get for trying to help some people out with 1 single comment.
3.I have said COUNTLESS times to you that I DO NOT HAVE THE TIME to do what you're asking of me. Do I need to write it in the sky for you? I said it right off the bat, you want studies look for 'em cause I don't have the time with my professional or family life. Did you get that this time?
Hey if you still want to talk that's fine, but not if you're going to be rude to me. Screw that. I DO however think you should apologize for your comment to me in the other thread. It was really unnecessary to say that shit.

**Two4the$$** · 10-11-2005, 10:26 AM

Dragon - dude - All I did was REMIND you to not ignore this one. The exact statement was ...

"You should pop your head back in on that other thread and rebutt..."

I just don't get what's all that rude about it.

**dragon69** · 10-11-2005, 10:39 AM

maybe you should look closer then at the statement and think how it would come across to someone outside of yourself. I found it offensive (insulting actually) and have told you that 3 times now. Can you not apologize for it?

I hope you're not intending on arguing whether I should be offended or not. Fact is I was, which I pointed out to you a number of times.

**Two4the$$** · 10-11-2005, 10:42 AM

Well, seriously, perhaps you should up your AI or SERM use - cause that's a bit overly sensitive.

**dragon69** · 10-11-2005, 11:29 AM

it's becoming obvious that you have not intention of apologizing. So easy, but yet you refuse. You also seem to want to take no blame for offending me. You did though.
Told you you'd want to argue whether I should be offended or not. Fact is I was though.
Comments about sensitivity aren't necessary here. I'll tell you what's going on, it was a little offending at first but has grown due to your stubborness on not apologizing for your comments and insistence on blaming my interpretation or sensitivity.
I have no estrogen issues and do use arimidex (2mg eod) anyway.
You sure seem to like arguing points no matter how small.
Shit how damn hard is it to say you're sorry?

**Two4the$$** · 10-11-2005, 11:44 AM

Originally Posted by hooker

Thats not really playing by the rules...."I'll make the claims, then you find the research supporting them." isn't really how it's usually done...

I still reference every claim I make with proper references, and never refuse to post or find studies...and I'll wager alot of people would just take my word on it.....but I post them anyway.

Its not hard... but when I don't feel it's warranted - I don't mean it. And when I say it without meaning it ... I discount the value of every apology I have or will give. There certainly have been times that I have apologized here for being misunderstood (and enabling it) and for being an a$$hole, which I can be when I jump on here in a bad mood.

I'm NOT going to apologize to you for not respecting you as an authority on a subject in which your credentials cannot be searched for publically. I'm just not.

I said it before in an earlier post. I have nothing against you. Nothing! I have thought you're an okay guy in other posts... and just feel that something is being lost in the communication here. If you recall ... you've called me names, touted your credentials ... and site "lack of time" as an adequate reason for not taking responsibility to support your statements.

I have said it before ... and I will say it again...

The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.

**100%NATURAL-theGH** · 10-11-2005, 11:47 AM

This is not what I intended this thread to be used for... I would appreciate it if any arguments would be taken elsewhere. Please don't make me delete my own thread. Thanks guys.

**100%NATURAL-theGH** · 10-11-2005, 11:50 AM

Alright so this is how I'm going to run my cycle:
1-16 500mg Test E/week
1-15 400mg EQ/week
1-15 200mg Deca /week
1-? 80mg Var/day (I may take a break in the middle and then use this again right up until PCT)

I will also be getting one vial of IGF and want to run it at 40mcg a day 5/2 split... when do you think this would be best to use? Durring PCT or durring the cycle?

**dragon69** · 10-11-2005, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by 100%NATURAL-theGH

This is not what I intended this thread to be used for... I would appreciate it if any arguments would be taken elsewhere. Please don't make me delete my own thread. Thanks guys.

sure. You're right. Looks like this thing has gotten carried away.

truman, some other place then. I really only wanted an apology for the 1 comment you made. Shouldn't be this hard.

**Two4the$$** · 10-11-2005, 01:03 PM

If my disingenuous apology will allow for the free-flow of information to proceed - here.

Sorry.

But I'm not sorry for the following, and want to be clear about it.

You aren't an authority.
You need to support your arguments.

100%Natural...

I'm not completely thrilled personally with your cycle choice.

I've heard many mixed reviews about IGF-1 ... mainly circulating around it being a pricey answer that isn't all it's cracked up to be.

NPP I ran for a bit, didn't see much happening. Tren is WAY better. WAY better.

5 on/5 off on the var will give you 10 weeks usage, with a 5 week recovery period for your organs.

EQ is good, but I'd choose Masteron if I had to choose between those two - lowering SHBG is a pretty promising angle...

**100%NATURAL-theGH** · 10-11-2005, 02:08 PM

Who hasn't heard mixed reviews about anything??? have you used it yourself? As far as Var goes I don't think any damage is really an issue with the stuff... and what is NPP??? Tren hurts my joints really bad so that is out of the question...and Masteron can cause joint pain similar to Winstrol so it wouldn't be my choice.. I think the cycle looks pretty solid... much shorter than my previous ones but I'm looking to have a much faster recovery this go around!

Originally Posted by TrumanHW

If my disingenuous apology will allow for the free-flow of information to proceed - here.

Sorry.

But I'm not sorry for the following, and want to be clear about it.

You aren't an authority.
You need to support your arguments.

100%Natural...

I'm not completely thrilled personally with your cycle choice.

I've heard many mixed reviews about IGF-1 ... mainly circulating around it being a pricey answer that isn't all it's cracked up to be.

NPP I ran for a bit, didn't see much happening. Tren is WAY better. WAY better.

5 on/5 off on the var will give you 10 weeks usage, with a 5 week recovery period for your organs.

EQ is good, but I'd choose Masteron if I had to choose between those two - lowering SHBG is a pretty promising angle...

**Property of Steroid.com** · 10-11-2005, 02:30 PM

Originally Posted by 100%NATURAL-theGH

This is not what I intended this thread to be used for... I would appreciate it if any arguments would be taken elsewhere. Please don't make me delete my own thread. .

Last time you deleted your own thread you deleted about 45 minutes of my work (looking up studies, etc...) as you know. If you keep deleting threads you'll be deleting people's willingness to help you as well.

**shortie** · 10-11-2005, 02:53 PM

Originally Posted by TrumanHW

Well, seriously, perhaps you should up your AI or SERM use - cause that's a bit overly sensitive.

Judging by the way some threads have been going lately I think we could all use a little less clomid!LOL!

**THEjuiceISloose73** · 10-11-2005, 03:07 PM

sorry im gonna have to agree with swole and pinnacle why not listen to the guys who know there shit
**** look at swolecate hes a ****ing monster if he told me to jump i would say how high hahahaha
and pinnacle has knowledge about everything he has helped me tons of times
why not replace the test in ur body at least with 250mg or soemthing to make sure its a good cycle it cant hurt and its safer
test is what everything is derrived from i would never go without it

Thread: Eq/deca/var Cycle-just Injected

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Rate This Thread

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions

Zebol 50 - deca?

34 Years Old, Strong, and Always...

Need a clenbuterol source

Does Flowmax effect anything?

My First Cycle: Planning and...

Zebol 50 - deca?

Zebol 50 - deca?

Zebol 50 - deca?

Zebol 50 - deca?