Moderate Dose Short Cyles - Steroids for Health!

[JohnnyB]

Way back when Roberts posted that article I looked back on the site for follow-up for a long itme...., I don't remember "Jim" ever going back on after 4 weeks off. it turned into a single 2 week cycle. I didn't put much creedance into the whole thing after that.

I do think cycles like 4 on 4 off are pretty effective, using short esters.

Now that you mention that, I remember the same thing, Jim was a no show for the rest of the tests. Which tells me it didn't go as planned.

JohnnyB

[AleX-69]

When you post someone elses post, you need to either leave out what you don't agree with or explain why you don't agree. But from most of your answer here, I would say you shouldn't of post any of them and just wrote what you think of the issue, you seem to disagree with the major point of the whole idea.

JohnnyB

Well I don't disagree with the majority of points. But there are certainly some points I disagree with.
By quoting this arcticles i wanted to give as much information on short cycles to the board members. So that everybody can decide for themselves if short cycles suit their needs. I stated my own opinion on some of the points mentioned within this thread. But basicly i think i don't disagree with enough points to write my own "short cycle theory" or whatever.. I do not want credits for sth I haven't "invented" myself..

regards

[AleX-69]

Then you don't agree with the original posters of this idea. So here's my question to you, and if you've covered it please forgive me. I will admit I didn't read every post to much to go through as mentioned already.

What have your results been and do you have any pictures? As I mentioned this idea has been around for a long time and it hasn't caught on with those on these boards. I have seen it brought up more then once since it came out and have never seen a post by someone that has used the method and had something good to say about it. Believe me I've been on these boards for almost 4 years now and have never seen anyone say anything good about it that has used it. I've heard lots of people say they were going to try it. The reason I believe no one has said they used it is cause, there's lots of people that disagree with this method, so people don't want to admit that they tried it and it didn't work, they don't want to be the one that didn't listen but did it anyway.

JohnnyB

Yes I have done short cycles!
Yes I did see good results from them! (thats why i started this thread )

Let me lay out my cycle history and why i have done some short cycles. I'm not that expierienced with roids as some of the other users on this board are, but see for yourself:

2002: 1st cycle test/deca - everything went fine gained approx 20lbs - 15kept but felt kinda shitty afterwards (depressed sort of)
2003: 2nd cylce test/EQ - gained weight (approx 25lbs) but wasn't sastisfied with the qualtiy (also gained fat)... maybe 8lbs muscle I suppose i got fake gear. Defentily felt bad after the cycle..!
2004: 3rd cylce prop/OT 4 weeks (low dose): gained 9lbs of which i kept 7. No problem coming off.
4th cycle prop/OT 4 weeks (moderate dose): gained 12lbs of which i kept 9.
2005:: 5th cycle prop/var (diet): gained 5lbs, kept all + lost a good amount of bf
2006: 6th cycle var only / 8 wks (diet): in week 6 right now and I'm already up 3lbs + lost a good amount of bodyfat.

So you see my main reason why i tried short cycles was 'cause it was kinda hard for me to come off a longer cycle...
On reason short cycles seem to work for me fairly well is, that i tend to response very quickly to aas. It might be a bit more difficult to produce satisfying reslust for guys with lower aas responsivness (or it simply may require higher dosages )

Between my cycles there has always been plenty of off time - 12 weeks min!
That is why i can not comment on HCG that much. I simply don't use it as i don't string short cycles toghether.
Moreover for me there is no need to rush things + i always prefer to keep dosages sane as long as i gain weight. I have no ambition to compete ..


I'd like to add one more comment in general. There are certainly users of short cycles who had sucess. Some of them are even here on this board i.e. marcus, xtralarg, tallyjuice and others. Moreover there a several users who report to make their best gains in the first 4 weeks of a cycle (G-Force approx 20lbs,....).
In addition I want to point out that several of the newer steroid compounds (M1T, SD, Ergomax LMG, Phera-Plex) are only used for short periods of time! There has been an abundance of positive feedback concerning these cycles.
If you can achieve positive resulst with these compounds why should it be impossible with "the real deal" ?

regards and thx for your input.

[AleX-69]

Johnny B-

Quote.. "I like the idea of short cycles in theory for health purposes but only with the right compounds. For advance users that have cycled before this can be another way to go about running cycles to get past small plateau. But for a new user to the game the basic test cycle for 10 weeks is the way to go. You might as well get as mush from the cycle as you possibly can......JMO"..end Quote

~Pinnacle~

I agree with that statement. My first post in this thread indicates that 1st time users may be better off using a traditional cycle.

[AleX-69]

*edited*

[Pinnacle]

I'd like to add one more comment in general. There are certainly users of short cycles who had sucess. Some of them are even here on this board i.e. marcus, xtralarg, and others.

Now you sound like a cheap salesman pitching an idea.You know all to well the short cycles marcus talks about are very different from the shit posted here.I in fact recently ran one with great success,BUT I would NEVER EVER think about running a cycle like you are trying to sell on this board.Why you ask?Because they make No sense at all.Maybe you haven't noticed the poor response you got to this thread?You've made the majority of the posts here trying to dump this bullshit down everyones throat.I don't see ppl flooding to ask questions about this bullshit...maybe no ones buys it,that's why.

~Pinnacle~

[AleX-69]

Yeah right pin... no need to insult me! I am not trying to convine anybody that short cycling is the only way to go...in what way would it benifit me anyway?

One has to find the a way of cycling which suites his needs and goals best! I stated that several times. So i think short cycling is perfect for me but if it isn't for you... well do whats working best for you.. no problems with that..

Well plz let me know the diffrences between short moderate dose cycling and Heavy dose short cycling (besides slin & GH).

Anyway i had a good laugh reading your post..

[tallyjuice]

I don't understand why people get mad about this guy showing another theory, no matter if it has been proposed before or not. A lot of the third year students at my law school have done short cycles VERY RECENTLY. The three that I spoke to all liked the results, and I did as well. Two of them ran at high dosages and the other at moderate. Let's not attack the person but instead the theory. That is what an intelligent coversation should consist of so that we can all learn from it. I for one just learned more about HCG from listening to Johnny and Alex discussing it. I really like this topic. Let's here some more from other vets, mods abd thosewith previous experience.

Oh and I never had any testicular atrophication at after three 4 on/4 off cycles. Maybe it is because the tbol only was a light compund based cycle. What are your thoughts?

[marcus300]

Since someone asked me to look at this, I'll say this, the idea has been around for over 2 years, maybe even 3, if it was that great why aren't people raving about on all the boards? The idea sounds good but it doesn't work like you'd think

JohnnyB

Short cycling as been around for years infact its been around as long as long cycles have, its used widely throughout Europe with great effect, why people are not raving about it on this board is because alot of BB' are stuck in their ways and the mojority follow certain BB's round like a flock of sheep saying exactly what others are saying, eventually everyone is saying the same thing.

I personaly like the whole idea of short cycling because of the less sides and health reasons, i know looking back through my cycle diary that when ever ive done a shorter cycle ive recovered far better and sooner, i know what certain studies say that its the same recovery and its the same level of sides or even worse, but through my bodybuilding research ive seen so many conflicting studies its laughable, the best thing to have is first hand experience on how it works for you, i have enough time off a short cycle which is required for me to get back to normal then i start priming for a long time then design my next cycle, there is no set rule with the time off.

I fully understand that this way of cycling is not for everyone, but its worth considering because you never know you may get the same results as a long cycle,

Now my way of short cycling is completely different than the standard short cycle which is written in this thread, ive found a way to push me past a sticking point and get the same results as i do or even better than a standard cycle or long one,am not just talking about gear here its also the prime which is a usefull tool to have in any cycle, if its done correctly.

When i do a standard short cycle its normaly a cutter cycle with fast esters, but am open to discussion with any kind of cycling because there are many ways which cycles work, you just have to find the one which works best for your body, its impossible to say they are rubbish because to the next man they might be the best thing since slice bread, never dismiss anything we are all different in how we respond to AAS. I remember once what Dorian said when he retired in a seminar in England, his body responds with short intesne training and gear, hit it hard for a short period and rest and recover, he said that was with every aspect of bodybuilding for him. which i must add is not what this thread is about, more the theory in the short heavy thread.

[sp9]

I don't understand why people get mad about this guy showing another theory

I personally am not mad. I have been here a while, and I always keep in mind that 99 out of 100 new people that sign up here, are people that have not reached their natural potential or do not have their workouts and diets in good form.

I always keep those figures in mind when I write or reply to threads here. I am glad Alex when back and put some more disclaimers on this thread.

New people with little or no experience that have not perfected workouts and dieting are looking for short cuts. When they see a thread like this without the proper checks and balances they get very excited about it when they should be really focusing on other areas.

Now, there is a target audience for this type of thing, I def. see that.

[AleX-69]

Short cycling as been around for years infact its been around as long as long cycles have, its used widely throughout Europe with great effect, why people are not raving about it on this board is because alot of BB' are stuck in their ways and the mojority follow certain BB's round like a flock of sheep saying exactly what others are saying, eventually everyone is saying the same thing.

I personaly like the whole idea of short cycling because of the less sides and health reasons, i know looking back through my cycle diary that when ever ive done a shorter cycle ive recovered far better and sooner, i know what certain studies say that its the same recovery and its the same level of sides or even worse, but through my bodybuilding research ive seen so many conflicting studies its laughable, the best thing to have is first hand experience on how it works for you, i have enough time off a short cycle which is required for me to get back to normal then i start priming for a long time then design my next cycle, there is no set rule with the time off.

I fully understand that this way of cycling is not for everyone, but its worth considering because you never know you may get the same results as a long cycle,

Now my way of short cycling is completely different than the standard short cycle which is written in this thread, ive found a way to push me past a sticking point and get the same results as i do or even better than a standard cycle or long one,am not just talking about gear here its also the prime which is a usefull tool to have in any cycle, if its done correctly.

When i do a standard short cycle its normaly a cutter cycle with fast esters, but am open to discussion with any kind of cycling because there are many ways which cycles work, you just have to find the one which works best for your body, its impossible to say they are rubbish because to the next man they might be the best thing since slice bread, never dismiss anything we are all different in how we respond to AAS. I remember once what Dorian said when he retired in a seminar in England, his body responds with short intesne training and gear, hit it hard for a short period and rest and recover, he said that was with every aspect of bodybuilding for him. which i must add is not what this thread is about, more the theory in my thread i started.

Very well said!

[AleX-69]

Oh and I never had any testicular atrophication at after three 4 on/4 off cycles. Maybe it is because the tbol only was a light compund based cycle. What are your thoughts?

May be possible. On the other hand it also may possible that you had some minor shrinkage but didn't noticed it... (granted you didn't measure the size of your balls ED ).

[Pinnacle]

Clever bump... anything to get the thread on top huh?

[Ntpadude]

You are right on this one. That is why I personally wouldn't advocate 4on / 4 off. I suggested a longer off period (6-8wks) on page 1 in this thread beacuse of HPTA and HDL/LDL recovery reasons..

If deca or tren get involved, well deca for one continues shut down for 4 weeks after a shot, so if you time off at week 4 and restart 4 weeks later, you never even restarted. This time on=time off thing needs some clarification. Time OFF doesnt start until ALL the steriods have worn off completely so in the case of Deca you have 3.5 weeks, EQ takes 4.5 weeks (before its even practical to start clomid therapy that is), this is where in ALL CASES the minimum time off has to be 10 weeks rather you were on only 4 weeks or 10 weeks. I think if you do testosterone enanthate only, then your 4 week on/4 week off is suitable because testosterone enanthate doesnt shut down your natural production for about 3 weeks so if you are 4 weeks on and 4 weeks off, your total shutdown time during this time frame is 2.5 maybe 3 weeks, so short that actually AS your testosterone is wearing off, your natural testosterone is picking up the gap... probably dont even have enough time to have any inhibitory amounts of estrogen in this short time frame. And believe it or not, many guys have done testosterone only cycles of even 10 weeks and noticed absolutely NO changes to lipids or blood pressure. Some authors claim estrogen to be the worst steroid but I think in real world, other then gyno for the prone to gyno guys, nothing is safer with fewer side effects then testosterone. I want to add to another guy's notice... dbol and winny are terrible on lipids... but you can add anadrol and M1T to this list as the top of the artery cloggers list.

[AleX-69]

If deca or tren get involved, well deca for one continues shut down for 4 weeks after a shot, so if you time off at week 4 and restart 4 weeks later, you never even restarted. This time on=time off thing needs some clarification. Time OFF doesnt start until ALL the steriods have worn off completely so in the case of Deca you have 3.5 weeks, EQ takes 4.5 weeks (before its even practical to start clomid therapy that is), this is where in ALL CASES the minimum time off has to be 10 weeks rather you were on only 4 weeks or 10 weeks. I think if you do testosterone enanthate only, then your 4 week on/4 week off is suitable because testosterone enanthate doesnt shut down your natural production for about 3 weeks so if you are 4 weeks on and 4 weeks off, your total shutdown time during this time frame is 2.5 maybe 3 weeks, so short that actually AS your testosterone is wearing off, your natural testosterone is picking up the gap... probably dont even have enough time to have any inhibitory amounts of estrogen in this short time frame. And believe it or not, many guys have done testosterone only cycles of even 10 weeks and noticed absolutely NO changes to lipids or blood pressure. Some authors claim estrogen to be the worst steroid but I think in real world, other then gyno for the prone to gyno guys, nothing is safer with fewer side effects then testosterone. I want to add to another guy's notice... dbol and winny are terrible on lipids... but you can add anadrol and M1T to this list as the top of the artery cloggers list.

a lot of good points in there. But plz i never said 4 on / 4off would be suitable. You even quoted me where i said i#d suggest longer off times.

Moreover you are right that long estered injectables have to be stoped a reasonable amount b4 the end of cycle to allow nearly complete steriod cleanse b4 pct begins.

[tallyjuice]

a lot of good points in there. But plz i never said 4 on / 4off would be suitable. You even quoted me where i said i#d suggest longer off times.

Moreover you are right that long estered injectables have to be stoped a reasonable amount b4 the end of cycle to allow nearly complete steriod cleanse b4 pct begins.

4on/4off is more than suitable if you are doing low dose. I know many people that have done them with no problem in recovery. Also, you should look at Swale's (Dr. John) comments on HCG use. No more than 250iu per administration because anymore is counterproductive. Also, he tore Bill Roberts to shit in a forum. This Dr. does so much HRT bloodwork on his patients...it's incredible.

[tallyjuice]

Also, read both these articles. The first is from his initial work and the second is done after. READ BOTH!

Swale's HCG advice (sticky)
1.
by swale (MD / hrt specailist). originally posted at ************

I advise my AAS patients to use small amounts of HCG (250IU to 500IU) two days each week, right from the beginning of the cycle. This serves to maintain testicular form and function. It makes more sense to me to keep the horse in the barn, so to speak, then to have to chase it across three counties later on. I am also a big fan of maintaining estrogen within physiological ranges. Both therapies have been shown to hasten recovery.

Any more than 500IU of HCG per day causes too much aromatase activity. Some feel aromatase is actually toxic to the Leydig cells of the testes. You are then inducing primary hypogonadism (which is permanent) while treating steroid -induced secondary (hypogonadotrophic) hypogonadism (which is temporary--hopefully).

If 250IU or 500IU on two days each week isn?t enough to stave off testicular atrophy, then I recommend using it more days each week (as opposed to taking larger doses). In fact, I wouldn?t mind having a guy use 250IU per day ALL THROUGH the cycle. Those that have tell me they thus avoid that edgy, burned-out feeling they usually get. They also say they simply feel better each day. Subjective reports, to be sure, but they are hard not to appreciate. Especially when HCG is so inexpensive.

The testes are then ready, willing and able to again produce testosterone at the end of the cycle. LH levels rise fairly rapidly, but endogenous testosterone production is limited by lack of use. I also want to make sure a SERM, such as Clomid or Nolvadex , is at effective serum dosage (around 100mg QD for Clomid, 20-40mg QD for Nolvadex) when serum androgen levels drop to a concentration roughly equal to 200mg of testosterone per week. That is when androgenic inhibition at the HP no longer dominates over estrogenic antagonism with respect to inducing LH production. Of course, if the fellow has been doing Clomid or Nolvadex all along the way (and I now prefer Nolvadex over Clomid, due to the possibility of negative sides from the Clomid), he is all set to simply continue it at the end (no need to switch from one to the other). BTW, I see no evidence of any benefit in using BOTH SERM?s at the same time. I used to think a couple of weeks of the SERM was enough; now I like to see an entire month after the last shot of AAS (and migration of long to short esters as the cycle matures). Tapering the SERM is probably a good idea during the last week, as well.

I want my patients to stop taking HCG within a week after the end of the cycle. The testosterone production it induces will further inhibit recovery, as will using Androgel , or any other testosterone preparation, while in recovery. There is no escaping this, as there is no such thing as a ?bridge?. Just because you are not inhibiting the HPTA for the entire 24 hours does not mean you are not suppressing it at all. IOW, you can?t ?fool? the body?it is smarter than you are.

I like Arimidex during the cycle (in fact, consider use of an AI while taking aromatisables a necessity) but it ABSOLUTELY should not be used post cycle (even though it has been shown to increase LH production) because the risk of driving estrogen too low, and therefore further damaging an already compromised Lipid Profile, is too great (this also drives libido back into the ground?and we don?t want that, do we?).

All this is meant to get my guys through recovery as fast as possible (the real goal, yes?). So far, all of them who have tried it have reported they are recovering faster than when they have tried other



JC: Dr. John has updated the original paper you published. Here it is:

My New HCG Protocol Paper
This paper is about to be published in The American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine 2004 Clinical Updates:

AN UPDATE TO THE CRISLER HCG PROTOCOL

By John Crisler, DO

In my paper “My Current Best Thoughts on How to Administer TRT for Men”, published in A4M’s 2004/5 Anti-Aging Clinical Protocols, I introduced a new protocol where small doses of Human Chorionic Gonadotrophin (HCG) are regularly added to traditional TRT (either weekly IM testosterone cypionate or daily cream/gel). The reasons and benefits of this protocol are as follows, along with a new improvement I wish to share:

Any physician who administers TRT will, within the first few months of doing so, field complaints from their patients because they are now experiencing troubling testicular atrophy. Irrespective of the numerous and abundant benefits of TRT, men never enjoy seeing their genitals shrinking! Testicular atrophy occurs because the depressed LH level, secondary to the HPTA suppression TRT induces, no longer supports them. It is well known that HCG—a Luteinizing Hormone (LH) analog—will effectively, and dramatically, restore the testicles to previous form and function. It accomplishes this due to shared moiety between the alpha subunits of both hormones.

So, that satisfies an aesthetic consideration which should not be ignored. Now let’s delve into the pharmacodynamics of the TRT medications. For those employing injectable
testosterone cypionate , the cypionate ester provides a 5-8 day half-life, depending upon the specific metabolism, activity level, and overall health of the patient. It is now well-established that appropriate TRT using IM injections must be dosed at weekly intervals, in order to avoid seating the patient on a hormonal, and emotional, roller coaster. Adding in some HCG toward the end of the weekly “cycle” compensates for the drop in serum androgen levels by the half-life of the cypionate ester. Certainly the body thrives on regularity, and supplementing the TRT with endogenous testosterone production at just the right time—without inappropriately raising androgen OR estrogen (more on that later)—approximates the excellent performance stability of transdermal testosterone delivery systems for those who, for whatever reason or reasons, prefer test cyp.

But there’s another metabolic reason to employ this protocol. The P450 Side Chain Cleavage enzyme, which converts CHOL into pregnenolone at the initiation of all three metabolic pathways CHOL serves as precursor (the sex hormones, glucocorticoids and mineralcorticoids), is actively stimulated, or depressed, by LH concentrations. It is intuitively consistent that during conditions of lowered testosterone levels , commensurate increases in LH production would serve to stimulate this conversion from CHOL into these pathways, thereby feeding more raw material for increased hormone production. And vice versa. Thus the addition of HCG (which also stimulates the P450scc enzyme) helps restore a more natural balance of the hormones within this pathway in patients who are entirely, or even partially, HPTA-suppressed.

It is important that no more than 500IU of HCG be administered on any given day. There is only just so much stimulation possible, and exceeding that not only is wasteful, doing so has important negative consequences. Higher doses overly stimulate testicular aromatase, which inappropriately raises estrogen levels, and brings on the detrimental effects of same. It also causes Leydig cell desentization to LH, and we are therefore inducing primary hypogonadism while perhaps treating secondary hypogonadism. 250IU QD is an effective, and safe, dose. After all, we are merely replacing that which is lost to inhibition.

In my previous report I recommended 250IU of HCG twice per week for all TRT patients, taken the day of, along with the day before, the weekly test cyp injection. After looking at countless lab printouts, listening to subjective reports from patients, and learning more about HCG, I am now shifting that regimen forward one day. In other words, my test cyp TRT patients now take their HCG at 250IU two days before, as well as the day immediately previous to, their IM shot. All administer their HCG subcutaneously, and dosage may be adjusted as necessary (I have yet to see more than 350IU per dose required).

I made this change after realizing that the previous HCG protocol was boosting serum testosterone levels too much, as the test cyp serum concentrations rise, approaching its peak at roughly the 72 hour mark. The original goal of supporting serum androgen levels with HCG had overshot its mark.

Those TRT patients who prefer a transdermal testosterone, or even testosterone pellets (although I am not in favor of same), take their HCG every third day. They needn’t concern themselves with diminishing serum androgen levels from their testosterone delivery system. These patients will, of course, notice an increase in serum androgen levels above baseline.

While HCG, as sole TRT, is still considered treatment of choice for hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism by many , my experience is that it just does not bring the same subjective benefits as pure testosterone delivery systems do—even when similar serum androgen levels are produced from comparable baseline values. However, supplementing the more “traditional” TRT of transdermal, or injected, testosterone with HCG stabilizes serum levels, prevents testicular atrophy, helps rebalance expression of other hormones, and brings reports of greatly increased sense of well-being and libido. My patients absolutely love it. As time goes on, we are coming to appreciate HCG as a much more powerful--and wonderful--hormone than previously given credit.

Copyright John Crisler, DO 2004. This article may, in its entirety or in part, be reprinted and republished without permission, provided that credit is given to its author, with copyright notice and 2. www.AllThingsMale.com clearly displayed as source. Written permission from Dr. Crisler is required for all other uses.

[AleX-69]

4on/4off is more than suitable if you are doing low dose. I know many people that have done them with no problem in recovery. Also, you should look at Swale's (Dr. John) comments on HCG use. No more than 250iu per administration because anymore is counterproductive. Also, he tore Bill Roberts to shit in a forum. This Dr. does so much HRT bloodwork on his patients...it's incredible.

Maybe form a HPTA standpoint (granted you only use low dosages) but what about HDL/LDL.. i posted a study below that demostrates that it might take up to 5 weeks to normalize the blood lipid profile after administering a low dose of winny for 6 weeks...

[AleX-69]

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.

[JohnnyB]

Yes I have done short cycles!
Yes I did see good results from them! (thats why i started this thread )

Let me lay out my cycle history and why i have done some short cycles. I'm not that expierienced with roids as some of the other users on this board are, but see for yourself:

2002: 1st cycle test/deca - everything went fine gained approx 20lbs - 15kept but felt kinda shitty afterwards (depressed sort of)
2003: 2nd cylce test/EQ - gained weight (approx 25lbs) but wasn't sastisfied with the qualtiy (also gained fat)... maybe 8lbs muscle I suppose i got fake gear. Defentily felt bad after the cycle..!
2004: 3rd cylce prop/OT 4 weeks (low dose): gained 9lbs of which i kept 7. No problem coming off.
4th cycle prop/OT 4 weeks (moderate dose): gained 12lbs of which i kept 9.
2005:: 5th cycle prop/var (diet): gained 5lbs, kept all + lost a good amount of bf
2006: 6th cycle var only / 8 wks (diet): in week 6 right now and I'm already up 3lbs + lost a good amount of bodyfat.

So you see my main reason why i tried short cycles was 'cause it was kinda hard for me to come off a longer cycle...
On reason short cycles seem to work for me fairly well is, that i tend to response very quickly to aas. It might be a bit more difficult to produce satisfying reslust for guys with lower aas responsivness (or it simply may require higher dosages )

Between my cycles there has always been plenty of off time - 12 weeks min!
That is why i can not comment on HCG that much. I simply don't use it as i don't string short cycles toghether.
Moreover for me there is no need to rush things + i always prefer to keep dosages sane as long as i gain weight. I have no ambition to compete ..


I'd like to add one more comment in general. There are certainly users of short cycles who had sucess. Some of them are even here on this board i.e. marcus, xtralarg, tallyjuice and others. Moreover there a several users who report to make their best gains in the first 4 weeks of a cycle (G-Force approx 20lbs,....).
In addition I want to point out that several of the newer steroid compounds (M1T, SD, Ergomax LMG, Phera-Plex) are only used for short periods of time! There has been an abundance of positive feedback concerning these cycles.
If you can achieve positive resulst with these compounds why should it be impossible with "the real deal" ?

regards and thx for your input.

Now I'm getting to know you and what you think. I see a pattern with what you thought were your best cycle and they involved fat lose. I think our philosophies are pretty much the same but we come at it from different angels. I'm not a high dose guy, I see LBM as the key to a cycle not the number of lbs gain, cause they can be fat too. I go for LBM cycles over a bulker, the problem I see with these gains of 20lbs more or less in the first 4 weeks, is there's a good amount of fat involved. I believe while using gear you should avoid gaining fat as much as possible, espescially if you are worried about your lipid panel.

Your depression was from your natural test levels being low, this is why I recommend HCG with cyles over 8 weeks and any cycle that has a 19-nor steroid in it.

Now back to the real deal I'm not familar with those compounds you mentioned, my question is how much of those gains do they keep? To the best of my knowledge the qucik fix orals are mostly water weight, the real deal that is

I'm with you, we need to do cycle that have health as it's basic priority, don't go for more mass at the risk of your health. Mass being, muscle and fat, lean mass should be the priority and if possibile fat lose with it. I know lots of guys that have done short cycle and loved them, but they were in the 6-8 week range. There was one that gained 20 or 22 lbs in 8 weeks and dropped I believe 2 to 4% BF, now that's a beautiful thing.

So as I said I think we are coming from the same philosiphy of health first, just different angels. There are some that come from a totally different angel and thais low dose cycle of 10-12 or more weeks, they have their philosiphy and I do see it. I've read a study that showed 300mg of test didn't do much to the lipid profile and there was some fat lose.

Bro I like doing this, I believe this is the way these boards should be, us giving our idea and respectfully debating them.

JohnnyB

[tallyjuice]

So, what do both of you guys think about the HCG use in these articles?

[AleX-69]

@JohnnyB

I REALLY appreciate what u said right there. That is exactly how i feel!

[AleX-69]

@tallyjuice

What is said in these articles you mentioned goes hand in hand with what johnnyB said a page ago IMHO. But as far as I'm concerned i do not have personal expierence with administering HCG so you might be better off waiting for jhonnyB's opinion on this topic.
As far as i know he is on TRT so he may have even better insight!

Interesting info though.

rg

[tallyjuice]

Wel Johnny, what do u think?

[JohnnyB]

Wel Johnny, what do u think?

Give me a few minutes to read it, I see it's by SWALE so I'm going to say that I agree with a lot he says, but I need to read it to make sure it's all by him and not other people as well

JohnnyB

[JohnnyB]

Give me a few minutes to read it, I see it's by SWALE so I'm going to say that I agree with a lot he says, but I need to read it to make sure it's all by him and not other people as well

JohnnyB

It goes with what I believe and have done. I use my HCG at 300iu every 3 days, rasie it to 500iu, when on a cycle. I've never tried his new way, but I've found that e3d worked better for me then his old way of Saturday and Sunday. I do agree that it helps with the libido, that's been my experience, I know I mentioned this once and some people said it couldn't make a difference. Well it looks like it was what is making the difference, as far as libido goes.

I've read a study that showed that 5 day of 300iu, can raise test levels and avoid the side effect of one 1500iu dose. Which is the desensitization of the testes to LH and raised E2 levels.

The thing about HCG is it help with recovery, in the sense that it gives you one less thing to recover from. Which helps you avoid that depression some get before or during PCT.

JohnnyB

[taquipariu]

@Alex-69

I didn´t understand about wich cycles you did long and which you did short.
And well... how much did you use in each cycle?

I like the idea, but I saw some big dose small cycles just work for shutting down endogenous production.

Thanks!

[manofsteel69]

this is by far one of the best threads I have read on here in awhile. I am very interested in doiong a short cycle, with my job and everything doing long cycles doing long cycles probably wont work for me. I thank johnyb and alex for all there input into this and many other that agree and disagree, its always good to see everything from all point of veiws, except for when the ross posts something lmao

[AleX-69]

@Alex-69

I didn´t understand about wich cycles you did long and which you did short.
And well... how much did you use in each cycle?

I like the idea, but I saw some big dose small cycles just work for shutting down endogenous production.

Thanks!

hi,

actually i did three short cycles and i am in my fourth one right now:

2004: 3rd cylce prop/OT 4 weeks (low dose): gained 9lbs of which i kept 7. No problem coming off.
4th cycle prop/OT 4 weeks (moderate dose): gained 12lbs of which i kept 9.
2005:: 5th cycle prop/var (diet): gained 5lbs, kept all + lost a good amount of bf
2006: prop/t-bol...[4weeks]: just started last week

When using prop and T-bol I usually use 150mg Test Prop EOD + 50mg T-bol ED. When using Var + Prop I replace the 50mg T-Bol wit 75mg of VAr.
This works excellent for ME an MY goals [which is to shed bodyfat and maintain muscle or even gain some].

On the other hand the cycle following this one will be a longer cylce consisting of t-bol and homemade primo , cause primo isn't very well suited for short cycles i feel...

[marcus300]

[QUOTE=AleX-69]hi,

actually i did two short cycles and i am in my third one right now:

2004: 3rd cylce prop/OT 4 weeks (low dose): gained 9lbs of which i kept 7. No problem coming off.
4th cycle prop/OT 4 weeks (moderate dose): gained 12lbs of which i kept 9.
2005:: 5th cycle prop/var (diet): gained 5lbs, kept all + lost a good amount of bf
2006: prop/t-bol...[4weeks]: just started last week

When using prop and T-bol I usually use 150mg Test Prop EOD + 50mg T-bol ED. When using Var + Prop I replace the 50mg T-Bol wit 75mg of VAr.
This works excellent for ME an MY goals [which is to shed bodyfat and maintain muscle or even gain some].

On the other hand the cycle following this one will be a longer cylce consisting of t-bol and homemade primo , cause primo isn't very well suited for short cycles i feel...[/QUOTE]



Alex, primo is effective on short run cycles you just have to use rather alot of it, but it does work out fine with no problems.

nice results by the way.

[AleX-69]

hi marcus,

well i know some of you guys are using 3gramms+ per week of primo during their short HEAVY cycles. that might be a bit much for me, as i am not THAT expierenced with steroids so far..
I was thinking about using acetate [homemade of course] for a short cycle,but in the end i wanted to see what primo can do for me in general and therefore i decided to do a traditional longer cycle.
If it goes well i most certainly will try primo in short cycles + at higher doses than i'll be using now to see if the results are compareable.

And thanks for the nice words btw

RG

[taquipariu]

hi,

actually i did three short cycles and i am in my fourth one right now:

2004: 3rd cylce prop/OT 4 weeks (low dose): gained 9lbs of which i kept 7. No problem coming off.
4th cycle prop/OT 4 weeks (moderate dose): gained 12lbs of which i kept 9.
2005:: 5th cycle prop/var (diet): gained 5lbs, kept all + lost a good amount of bf
2006: prop/t-bol...[4weeks]: just started last week

When using prop and T-bol I usually use 150mg Test Prop EOD + 50mg T-bol ED. When using Var + Prop I replace the 50mg T-Bol wit 75mg of VAr.
This works excellent for ME an MY goals [which is to shed bodyfat and maintain muscle or even gain some].

On the other hand the cycle following this one will be a longer cylce consisting of t-bol and homemade primo , cause primo isn't very well suited for short cycles i feel...

Yes. My goals are the same as yours...

I´m trying to suit a 100mg ED propionate cycle, but my personal and principal problem is baldness. I am 24 now, having my 2nd cycle on this one. But I am having significant hairloss... Too young to be naturally bald.

Any suggestions to accompany a 2 week 100mg propionate cycle, minding of baldness problems, or is it a concern for not doing the cycle, even the short one?

[AleX-69]

Well i am not prone to MPB, but as i understand it hairloss is due to androgen buildup in the scalp. I.E. the shorter the cycle, the lower the risk to lose some hair. Moreover a topical DHT Blocker [nizoral shampoo 2%] might be a thing to consider.
I would not use Finasteride though...

In the end no one will be able to tell if you will be loosing hair on a short cycle. But the risk is significantly lower...

[marcus300]

Yes. My goals are the same as yours...

I´m trying to suit a 100mg ED propionate cycle, but my personal and principal problem is baldness. I am 24 now, having my 2nd cycle on this one. But I am having significant hairloss... Too young to be naturally bald.

Any suggestions to accompany a 2 week 100mg propionate cycle, minding of baldness problems, or is it a concern for not doing the cycle, even the short one?

If your prone to MPB then there is nothing you can do, there are products what you can use what will slow the process down but the end result is a bald head am afraid,

just shave and go......

[stupidhippo]

hair is overrated

[oswaldosalcedo]

hair is overrated

no way..................lol..............
i have a lot!

non mpb!

[No One Knows]

I prefer shorter cycles anyway...

I'd be interested on running tren like this, because after a month or so on tren my hair falls out lik no other.

[No One Knows]

luckily i was born with a full head of hair and its VERY thick..

but yeah..trens hard on my hair

[AleX-69]

LEt us know how it goes. just finishing my recent t-prop/winny short cycle and heading int clomid/proviron /Igf-1 pct.. After that i'll be runnign prop/primo ace .. Curious how it goes

[No One Knows]

igf-1 in pct sounds like a great addition to short cycle pct..

Keep on growin thru PCT.. Definitly giving this a go in a few months..