Short heavy cyles explained- PB theory

[marcus300]

hey marcus ,can you outline a sample 30day cycle, just curious .. peace bro

I will not post dosages or cycles on this thread, its only for the advanced bodybuilder who knows what he is doing

[AleX-69]

The trouble what as happened is recently in the last few post other BB's have mentioned about short cycles for the newbies, which is nothing to do with this thread, i have stated this when it was posted, this is why recently people have been mentioning short cycle for the newbies.

Well that is exactly how i feel + i think this was mostly my fault. Some people just can't differentiate between two diffrent approches to the same theory.

Actually i do have 2 more "articles" i would have posted in this thread concering moderate dose short cycles.
But i don't know if it would make matters worse ..
On the other hand I could start a comlpletly new thread (something like "Moderate Dose Burst Cycles - Newbies this is for you" )to clear things up. Whats your opinion on that marcus...?

[marcus300]

Well that is exactly how i feel + i think this was mostly my fault. Some people just can't differentiate between two diffrent approches to the same theory.

Actually i do have 2 more "articles" i would have posted in this thread concering moderate dose short cycles.
But i don't know if it would make matters worse ..
On the other hand I could start a comlpletly new thread (something like "Moderate Dose Burst Cycles - Newbies this is for you" )to clear things up. Whats your opinion on that marcus...?

That would be better to start a new thread regarding your cycle for newbies,
i fully understand what your talking about and i have some good experiences with such short cycle but its nothing to do with this type of cycling,

At least we have cleared the air abit,

regards marcus

[AleX-69]

So I started a new thread Moderate Dose Short Cyles - Steroids for Health!

marcus and others feel free to add your comments and expierences with that kind of cycling.

regards

[marcus300]

This has been one of the more interesting topics in a while. I'd hate to see it go because a few people may get in over their head with these ideas. Quite frankly, this isn't the first time dangerous advise has been circulated from newbie to newbie. I think a fair warning has been given repeatedly.

Either way, thanks to everyone who contributed.

Exactly, their as been plenty of warnings that this is not for the newbie, its only for the advanced.

One of the best thing a newbie can take from my thread is the prime before a cycle, this is very important and has huge advantages

[stupidhippo]

My question is.. as it is argued here that these short cycles are better for your lipid profile I would like some clarification.. It is argued that in 4 weeks (or whatever) the profile doesnt go as bad.. what Im thinking is then does the time off give enough time for the lipid profile to normalize and most importantly has anyone taken frequent bloodworks during this kind of cycling. I personally doubt it is enough that ur values have normalized if they then get messed up pretty soon after.. that would mean they would not be normal for most of the time. Many ppl here seem to think that if they are on for a long time and then they get off and have bloodwork done, and it comes back ok, then they are set to go another cycle..

[marcus300]

My question is.. as it is argued here that these short cycles are better for your lipid profile I would like some clarification.. It is argued that in 4 weeks (or whatever) the profile doesnt go as bad.. what Im thinking is then does the time off give enough time for the lipid profile to normalize and most importantly has anyone taken frequent bloodworks during this kind of cycling. I personally doubt it is enough that ur values have normalized if they then get messed up pretty soon after.. that would mean they would not be normal for most of the time. Many ppl here seem to think that if they are on for a long time and then they get off and have bloodwork done, and it comes back ok, then they are set to go another cycle..

This type of short cycle theory is better on your system, alot of my studies have had their blood work done and they all said that they recovered quicker than the cycles they were doing beforehand, the damage accours when you stay on gear to long, your body gets use to the hormones and shuts itself down and recovery is very hard work, maybe not when your younger as much but as you get older and try to come off the recovery is really hard and usually HRT comes sooner than expected or you end up going back on, then you have to increase the dose to try and get new muscle growth.i personaly stay on pct until ive fully recovered, no matter what time scale it is.

If your prime the body correctly and get the gear in and out in a short period then its far better on your system, and before your body can respond with side effects your off and recovering, i understand people will recover at different rates but in most they recover alot quicker and better, am not saying go straight back on a cycle when your blood work is correct, i would rather prime my body over a long time then repeat a cycle but normaly the one that follows the heavy short cycle is a mild one, i do know BB's who go straight back on after a heavy cycle when there blood work is fine but these BB's are competeing at a high class and its their disission.

All i can say is if your advance enough and have plenty of expeirence in gear and training give one a go and see if they are for you, most people are very stunned with the results of how much new muscle tissue can be obtained if the correct tools are applied.

Regards marcus

[stupidhippo]

I agree with that logic but I meant about its effect on the lipid profile, I was talking about that.. IMO the biggest long term risk of steroid use aint HRT.. I am not an expert and I am curious.. Thats why I asked has anybody taken frequent blood profiles and Im especially interested in the lipid profile. Im looking into new ideas and if indeed it would be so that this type of cycling would be less damaging to the lipid profile as a whole (in long term) it might be safer IMO. Im not doubting this kind of cycling would be effective.. that makes perfect sense for me.

[needbigguns]

Not trying to hi-jack but how about Short Moderate cycles as opposed to Heavy...do they work, dos anyone have any experiance with them ? Im interested tp try a shorty but am not yet advanced enough to use very high dosages...

short LIGHT cycles...as opposed to HEAVY

I like the idea of being able to cycle throughout the year more safely...Is there any evidence to prove this ?

I also enjoy being on and i think its easyer to train intensly for 1 month solid with everything in check that 12 weeks,

[AleX-69]

I agree with that logic but I meant about its effect on the lipid profile, I was talking about that.. IMO the biggest long term risk of steroid use aint HRT.. I am not an expert and I am curious.. Thats why I asked has anybody taken frequent blood profiles and Im especially interested in the lipid profile. Im looking into new ideas and if indeed it would be so that this type of cycling would be less damaging to the lipid profile as a whole (in long term) it might be safer IMO. Im not doubting this kind of cycling would be effective.. that makes perfect sense for me.

I had bloodwork done the last cycle after 3 weeks in. The HDL / LDL ratio was way off. So i don't think short cycles can prevent worsening of the blood lipid profile.
But I think the real benefit lies in the short amount of time the lipid profile is actually bad. As i believe it takes some time until fatty deposits build up in the arteries and therby causing adverse health effects (i.e. arteriosclerosis).

[stupidhippo]

ok.. so imagine then that if u get back on after say 30 days it ends up so that ur levels are gonna be way off for most of the time and that IMO could lead to an increased risk.. So which is better.. doing a 3 month cycle were ur values are off for about that long and then being off for the same amount leaving some time for normaliztion and more importantly time when they stay normal.. or then the short way.. I really dont know but am interested in opinions.

[vitor]

This type of short cycle theory is better on your system, alot of my studies have had their blood work done and they all said that they recovered quicker than the cycles they were doing beforehand, the damage accours when you stay on gear to long, your body gets use to the hormones and shuts itself down and recovery is very hard work, maybe not when your younger as much but as you get older and try to come off the recovery is really hard and usually HRT comes sooner than expected or you end up going back on, then you have to increase the dose to try and get new muscle growth.i personaly stay on pct until ive fully recovered, no matter what time scale it is.

If your prime the body correctly and get the gear in and out in a short period then its far better on your system, and before your body can respond with side effects your off and recovering, i understand people will recover at different rates but in most they recover alot quicker and better, am not saying go straight back on a cycle when your blood work is correct, i would rather prime my body over a long time then repeat a cycle but normaly the one that follows the heavy short cycle is a mild one, i do know BB's who go straight back on after a heavy cycle when there blood work is fine but these BB's are competeing at a high class and its their disission.

All i can say is if your advance enough and have plenty of expeirence in gear and training give one a go and see if they are for you, most people are very stunned with the results of how much new muscle tissue can be obtained if the correct tools are applied.

Regards marcus

Greate post!

What do you think of the 2on 4off theory. Yust read a case study with "Bill Roberts", (hes client seemed to have make more progress with only 4 weeks on,than he ever could achieved "natrually".)

I guess the benefit here would be that you recover HPTA very quikly.....

[alwayson]

As are probably 20 other ppl. Why don't you guys leave him alone and pick up the two books he mentioned in this thread, why is nobody willing to do any research but rather go off of somebodies word they have never met. Not targeting you "alwayson" as I don't know you, but everyone in general that jumps in excitement when a new theory or idea is introduced by a VET or senior member. If he said take 10grams of Test/wk I bet half of these guys would do it, no questions asked.

don't worry about it bro...i know you are not targetting me.

I just don't understand this theory and how it applies to me. I consider myself pretty advanced in terms of dosages and my physique.

[marcus300]

ok.. so imagine then that if u get back on after say 30 days it ends up so that ur levels are gonna be way off for most of the time and that IMO could lead to an increased risk.. So which is better.. doing a 3 month cycle were ur values are off for about that long and then being off for the same amount leaving some time for normaliztion and more importantly time when they stay normal.. or then the short way.. I really dont know but am interested in opinions.

If you are on for a shorter time and you have good time off there would be less risk, ive read a study somewhere which mentions this, if your on for a long time there is increase risk to all the health problems but if you can attack the body with a shorter period and still gets results as you would with a long cycle, which one would you choose.
All the blood work results what ive seen have all been fine with correct time off

[marcus300]

Greate post!

What do you think of the 2on 4off theory. Yust read a case study with "Bill Roberts", (hes client seemed to have make more progress with only 4 weeks on,than he ever could achieved "natrually".)

I guess the benefit here would be that you recover HPTA very quikly.....

Ive seen the same thing recentley, looks intresting and will be trying it out, i do have BB's who run 20 days cycles with great resuts,
correct the benefit is recovery with same results as a long cycle.

cheers for your commets
marcus

[Booz]

this thread is a great read,it does not need deleting,marcus knows the newbs from the old hands!
no worries murries!!

[marcus300]

this thread is a great read,it does not need deleting,marcus knows the newbs from the old hands!
no worries murries!!

Thanks booz for your support and comments,

[stupidhippo]

If you are on for a shorter time and you have good time off there would be less risk, ive read a study somewhere which mentions this, if your on for a long time there is increase risk to all the health problems but if you can attack the body with a shorter period and still gets results as you would with a long cycle, which one would you choose.
All the blood work results what ive seen have all been fine with correct time off

I agree with this: shorter time on and a good time off and it should be ok BUT how long is good time off.. Is 4 weeks on 4 weeks off really enough or is it the maintenance type of cycle in between that in a way lengthens the time off (if u look at it that way).. I agree very interesting thread..

[AleX-69]

The short way is better IMHO, simply beacause i think i takes time to build up fatty depositis in the ateries. --> The longer your lipid profile is shitty the more adverse health effects you get.

But i don't know if i am right on this one...

[fitguy]

Not trying to hi-jack but how about Short Moderate cycles as opposed to Heavy...do they work, dos anyone have any experiance with them ? Im interested tp try a shorty but am not yet advanced enough to use very high dosages...

short LIGHT cycles...as opposed to HEAVY

I like the idea of being able to cycle throughout the year more safely...Is there any evidence to prove this ?

I also enjoy being on and i think its easyer to train intensly for 1 month solid with everything in check that 12 weeks,

i was wondering the same thats why i asked for a cycle sample to know if the doses suit me or not thats all, i am not a newbie and having only a few posts on this site doesnt make me a newbie , i am a member on many other sites . i dont also consider myself advanced by anymeans thats why i was wondering if someone can apply this cycling type using lower doses and thats why i asked for a a sample cycle to be pm to me to get a rough idea of the doses and cycle layout..peace .

[Pinnacle]

i was wondering the same thats why i asked for a cycle sample to know if the doses suit me or not thats all, i am not a newbie and having only a few posts on this site doesnt make me a newbie , i am a member on many other sites . i dont also consider myself advanced by anymeans thats why i was wondering if someone can apply this cycling type using lower doses and thats why i asked for a a sample cycle to be pm to me to get a rough idea of the doses and cycle layout..peace .

2 cycles pretty much makes you a newbie still...sorry to break the truth to you.

02-13-2006, 06:00 PM
fitguy


[quote=booz]well remind us of your stats and training exp,cycle exp?

185 cm ,78-80 kilos, looking to gain a net of 8 kilos at least from this cycle,, i have done one sustanon only cycle b4 for 9 weeks at 500mg and another test cycle and dbol at 30 mg which i stopped for hairloss problems fro the dbol i guess..

[AleX-69]

I agree with this: shorter time on and a good time off and it should be ok BUT how long is good time off.. Is 4 weeks on 4 weeks off really enough or is it the maintenance type of cycle in between that in a way lengthens the time off (if u look at it that way).. I agree very interesting thread..

____________________-

Reduction in high density lipoproteins by anabolic steroid (stanozolol ) therapy for postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Taggart HM, Applebaum-Bowden D, Haffner S, Warnick GR, Cheung MC, Albers JJ, Chestnut CH 3rd, Hazzard WR.

The effects of stanozolol, 17-methyl-2H-5 alpha-androst-2-eno [3,2-c] pyrazol-17 beta-ol, on lipoprotein levels were assessed in a short-term (6 wk) prospective study of 10 normolipidemic, postmenopausal, osteoporotic women. While total cholesterol and triglyceride levels remained constant, equal and offsetting responses were seen in low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (+30.9 +/- 28.1 mg/dl [mean +/- S.D.], p less than 0.01, a 21% increase) and high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (-32.5 +/- 11.9 mg/dl [mean +/- S.D.], p less than 0.001, a 53% decline). Hence the LDL/HDL ratio increased dramatically, from 2.5 +/- 0.7 to 6.8 +/- 2.5. Within HDL, stanozolol was associated with a greater decline in HDL2 (from 26.0 +/- 7.4 mg/dl to 3.8 +/- 1.9 mg/dl, p less than 0.001, an 85% decrease) than HDL3 (which diminished from 35.7 +/- 3.2 to 24.1 +/- 5.8 mg/dl. p less than 0.001, a 35% decrease). The major HLD apolipoproteins also declined (A-I by a mean of 41% and A-II by 24%, both p less than 0.001). Postheparin hepatic triglyceride lipase increased (off treatment 74 +/- 42 nmole free fatty acid min-1 mole-1, on treatment 242 +/- 110, n = 6, p = 0.06). All changes were reversed by 5 wk following termination of the drug. These lipoprotein changes suggest caution in the long term prescription of stanozolol, particularly in those without overriding clinical indications for its use.

_____________________________

Regarding this study 4 weeks off may not be enough.. A longer off period would be apropiate it seems.
Really good questions stupidhippo. I appreciate that!

[AleX-69]

@ fitguy

if you really insist on doing another cycle b4 you reach your natural limit look here

Moderate Dose Short Cyles - Steroids for Health!

all your questions are answerd there. If you would have read this thread carefully you'd know that!

[goose]

Nice posts Alex!!


goose4..

[primetime1]

alex: great post also, its sounds more appe****g to me for my possible next cyc.

[AleX-69]

thx guys! I appreciate iT!

[marcus300]

Emailed a friend last night who had his bloodwork done after 6 weeks fininshing a short heavy cycle the lipid profile included total cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol LDL-cholesterol and triglycerides he said it was all normal, under a long cycle he said it would take him alot longer to recover.

[marcus300]

At the moment there is alot of discussion regarding short cycles weather heavy/light/moderate, One of the factors which make short cycling so effective is the priming of the body, any short cycles will benefit from such practice, If this is done correctly than the speed of building muscle tissue can be done over a shorter period, also priming isnt just for short cycles any cycle can benefit from such practice.

marcus

[primetime1]

"When you are priming you must up your protein and aminos to compensate any catabolism"

marcus: when you say priming, you are just talkin about the diet portion or is there more details to the priming phase?

if one were to keep the diet consistantly clean and correcltly macroed for the indivual would this priming process be neccessary?

[marcus300]

"When you are priming you must up your protein and aminos to compensate any catabolism"

marcus: when you say priming, you are just talkin about the diet portion or is there more details to the priming phase?

if one were to keep the diet consistantly clean and correcltly macroed for the indivual would this priming process be neccessary?

You diet down and lose fat, just like a comp diet or i prefer to cycle my carbs 3 low 1 high this will create a very anabolic emviroment for muscle tissue to grow, the muscle receptors get highly excitable and upgrade and able to accept more glucose and because glucose levels are not full in the muscle the result is more deposited into the muscle when you start the cycle and increase the food,this enviroment builds muscle tissue very quickley, if this is done correcty and timed right when you start the cycle, growth is amazing,

i prefer cycling my carbs 3 days low(40% less than normal) 1 day high (15% higher than normal), i feel this is'nt to harsh on your muscle tissue and the 1 high carb day offsets any potential metobolic slowdown, which is extremely usefull in laying down metobolic boosting muscle or at least saving it. the high carb/low carb rotational diet upgrades the receptors cites on muscle tissue for insulin , this changes the bodys ability to store carbs as glycogen rather than fat.

[AleX-69]

@ primetime

you may also want to look at the UD 2.0 diet which is rather complex but also excelent for priming..IMO.

[Spyder]

I don't understand why these kind of cycles are not ideal for bodybuilders at top levels, wasn't dorian one of them?

[AleX-69]

Heavy burst cycling is in fact very well suited for competitive BB's. I think you mixed up comments on low dose short cycling & heavy dose short cycling.
Those are 2 diffrent approaches to the same theory.

regards

[guns626]

Great read, Thanks!

[Spyder]

Heavy burst cycling is in fact very well suited for competitive BB's. I think you mixed up comments on low dose short cycling & heavy dose short cycling.
Those are 2 diffrent approaches to the same theory.

regards

Yeh i just noticed, my bad.

[primetime1]

marcus, thanks for breakin down the priming part i appreciate it. when you are done priming do you continue to cycle your carbs like that? or do you eat to grow? (clean)
alex, where can i find info on that diet?

really dig the info on this thread, im leaning towards a 6 weeker for my next run in sept. so thanks to all who contributed.

[IBdmfkr]

Primetime, the priming process leads up until the cycle starts, then you eat like an animal.

[primetime1]

thanks for that last bit of info bro, much apprecaited.. i was figuring that when you actually went on, that youd have to eat to feed the muscles, but wasnt sure.

[AleX-69]

@ primetime

Warrior is also "UD 2.0ing". He's keepin his log right here on AR as the forums on www.bodyrecomposition.com are rather unfriendly

He has outlined some basics of the diet in his thread:

Warrior's Drop-40-Pounds-of-Fat Cycle


Nevertheless there is an e-book / book concering UD 2.0 by lyle mcdonald. It is certainly worth reading..

[primetime1]

alex, thanks for the additional info, im goin to take a look into that tonight.