var/primo Vs Var/low test 2nd Cycle?

[Sculpture]

MX3 I appologise I just found ther PM you sent me and I understand your point about being safe rather than sorry with atleast a hormone replacement dose of test on cycles. It's probly good advise to give in general I just think everyone should try different things so we all learn collectively more about various methods of using gear. The friends I know who have done cycles with no test are fine just like me. However your trying to save guys from potential sides due to no test in their cycle and i respect that to. Thanks for debating this with me it's been interesting.

[kfrost06]

If your limited understanding on this doesn't allow you to grasp why a male's body would function better with testosterone present, then no one here should have to prove that to you.

Big, I am a little lost. What evidence is he asking for? Is he claiming gear is not suppressive of testosterone or that a male does not need testosterone or that testosterone has no benefit to males? I think I am missing something. I don't understand why this post keeps popping back up.

[mx3]

............

[Big]

kfrost, I value your opinion, so please read all of his posts in this thread from the first one and see if perhaps I misunderstood. it looks to me like he is saying that test in not necessary even when on suppressive cycles, and although in some cases that may be true, in most I feel it is best to have at least a trt dose. I came in on the tail end of the debate, and admittedly read through it quickly, but it seemed mx3 was advocating at least a small dose of test to be the base of suppressive cycles, and sculpture wanted ''proof'' that was necessary.

[Sculpture]

I'm not gonna argue that in most cases it's probly better to hav test in the cycle. But if someone doesnt want to use test they dont need to be worried that some horrible thing is gonna happen to them because they didn't include it in a cycle. And I'm interested in alternative cycles cuz 95 percent of the gear users use test and we know predictably what that entails. Why not study the lesser known realms of cycling se we are always learning, that's where I'm coming from and I asked for proof that test has to be in a cycle or bad things will happen to illustrate a point.............noone has any proof. I like to inspire others to think outside the box the way i do. As I said atleast half if not more of my cycles hav been without test and I've learned the value of some of the other compounds out there this way. It's been a great set of expiriences all together.

[Biosynthetic]

I am sure that the only reason test is recommended during any suppressive cycle is just to prevent the side effects of low test. If a "a measly 100mg injection of Deca caused a total (100%) reduction of natural testosterone levels " than that can be related to a similar situation where a GnRH agonist is used to suppress natural test levels for research purposes.

"Administration of GnRH agonist plus 25 or 50 mg/wk of TE resulted in a significant reduction in both serum total and free testosterone levels to below baseline levels, whereas the 125-mg/wk dose maintained baseline levels, and the two highest doses (300 and 600 mg/wk) resulted in a significant increase above normal baseline levels (17)."

Dose-Dependent Effects of Testosterone on Regional Adipose Tissue Distribution in Healthy Young Men
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 2 718-726

Technically, you wouldn't ever have to add test to any cycles if you weren't concerned with potential risks of having extremely low test levels, but then some people can get away with very little PCT and never get androgenic side effects. There are always outliers in experiments, subjects that don't fit the trendline, but not all of us are. For the rest of us, AAS use has enough of its own risks, there is no need to unnecessarily add some more.

My vote goes to a little test to maintain levels unless you KNOW you don't need it.

[Sculpture]

That approach makes sense.