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

Hi,

Contemplating my second cycle...but firstly stats:

Age: 27
Weight: 215lbs
Height: 6ft
bodyfat: 15%
Arms: 17"
Bench: 120kg

Years lifting: 5
Cycle History: test e 500mg/pw for 12 weeks with dbol 30mg/day 4 weeks kickstart. (2 years ago)

Goal: Loose bodyfat while maintaining muscle, increase strength and add a small amount of LBM.

Was very happy with my first cycle but got moderate acne for some time afterwards. I know...if I'd listened to the advice I read so frequently about sticking to one compound first cycle I wold know if it was the test. Sometimes we have to learn the hard way!

So my questions are:

1. I started my first cycle at 375mg test per week and gradually rose to 500mg. Could fluctuating levels have resulted in increased sides? I love test and have some nice testoviron but do not want acne before summer.

2. Please let me know from your experience which of the following cycles would be best suited to my goals

a. 60mg var/day only - 8 weeks
b. 60mg var/day - 8 weeks/ 600mg primo -10 weeks
c. 60mg var/day - 8 weeks/ 250mg test e/week - 12 weeks

PCT will obviously vary depending on cycle.
As you can see from my options I am going for low sides.

Thanks in advance!

test should be the base for every cycle.

Thanks for the input but was hoping for something slightly more construcitve.

I stated my reasons of being wary of larger test doses.

Would you say then that 250mg/ week is enough base for a test/var cycle?

I would say no to option B right off the bat, primo takes awhile to "kick in" or do it's magic, it takes about 6-8 weeks before I even notice it's effects. Primo is also pretty suppressive and will stop your natural test production. So that leaves Opition A or C. A is good because of very quick recovery. Opition B, using only 250/wk is kinda low but I would personally go with C maybe even up it to 500mg/wk. In fact that is exactly what I just started myself ;>)

GL

Thanks for input Kfrost.

I am also swaying towards a and c but out of interest, would you like cycle b more if the primo was increased to 12 or 14 weeks?

Looks like a fun and productive cycle to me bro. Don't let all these testosterone drones get you down. I've done atleast half my cycles without test and enjoyed every one not to mention the great improvments to my body. I'm 6'2'' 240 at 8% bodyfat and ive used less test than most these little 180 pound self proclaimed experts on cycling who repeat little predictable phrases test should be the base for every cycle, test should be the base for every cycle, .....................etc etc. instead of replying to your thread. I think you'll do well go for it.

why not run option b with an hrt dose of test and extend the length.

In other words any one of those three cycles will be good, if i had to pick, id pick b if i could afford primo.

thanks Sculpture!

My thoughts exactly but I was prepared for it. I know how people like to parrot. I have read it enough times already so please everyone no more test should be the base comments as this is not helpful...It is just some peoples beliefs. And as Sculpture and many othes have proved - v good gains gain be yeilded without test if you are susceptible to sides or do not like the bloat.

What is your favorite no test cycle?

was also considering MX3's idea of option b wih 250mg test per week as a maintenace dose and to help with libido.

Any thoughts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sculpture

Looks like a fun and productive cycle to me bro. Don't let all these testosterone drones get you down. I've done atleast half my cycles without test and enjoyed every one not to mention the great improvments to my body. I'm 6'2'' 240 at 8% bodyfat and ive used less test than most these little 180 pound self proclaimed experts on cycling who repeat little predictable phrases test should be the base for every cycle, test should be the base for every cycle, .....................etc etc. instead of replying to your thread. I think you'll do well go for it.

---

there is a reason why test should be the base for every cycle. loss of libido, and prolonged recovery period to start. just because you didn't run into problems doesn't mean other people wont. and ive got many friends who outweigh you at 5'7-5'8 and guess what they dont run their cycles without test. start runnnig your mouth when you can back it up with a respected answer next time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xweighted

was also considering MX3's idea of option b wih 250mg test per week as a maintenace dose and to help with libido.

Any thoughts?

---

even 125mg wk keeps libido problems at bay for most people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xweighted

thanks Sculpture!

My thoughts exactly but I was prepared for it. I know how people like to parrot. I have read it enough times already so please everyone no more test should be the base comments as this is not helpful...It is just some peoples beliefs. And as Sculpture and many othes have proved - v good gains gain be yeilded without test if you are susceptible to sides or do not like the bloat.

What is your favorite no test cycle?

---

i am not talking about gains. you can on anything. in most of my cycles I let 19-nors do the work with a lower dose of test as I find test to be very weak compared. you will get more sides by not running test that is why it should be included.

Fair point MX3. thanks for the input.

You have to admit that that is alot more helpul than your first comment. lol

That is my aim to minimise the sides so I am certainly considering a low maintenance test dose.

I know it is idividual dependant but do you think it is likely test sides would be evident at a low dose of 250mg or less per week?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xweighted

Thanks for input Kfrost.

I am also swaying towards a and c but out of interest, would you like cycle b more if the primo was increased to 12 or 14 weeks?

---

yes but with something else, primo is very mild and works much better when stacked with something else. It is also pretty surpressive so running it alone for the extended 4-6 weeks is not worth it. IMO the cons out weigh the pros for that option. Primo is good but by itself it's so mild its really not worth it.

Kfrost to my knowledge primo is one of the least suppressive AAS... In fact a guy I know had bw after a primo only cycle and was within the normal range. I dont think test HAS to be the base of every cycle but since he has some already I would say atleast run an hrt dose (125mgs/week would suffice). Option B looks very tasty if you can get your hands on some human grade.

He went 850ng before the cycle to 600ng after the cycle after 10 weeks of primo and proviron.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dog-Slime

Kfrost to my knowledge primo is one of the least suppressive AAS... In fact a guy I know had bw after a primo only cycle and was within the normal range. I dont think test HAS to be the base of every cycle but since he has some already I would say atleast run an hrt dose (125mgs/week would suffice). Option B looks very tasty if you can get your hands on some human grade.

---

I am uncertian where you got your info from. Here is a copy of the primo profile from this site

http://www.steroid.com/Primobolan.php

"When men were given a 30-45mg dose of the oral version of Primo, they experienced a 15-65% decrease in gonadotropin levels (9). Remember, I said 100mgs is a good dose for gains... well, you´ll also reduce your gonadotropin levels considerably. I have personally never understood why people recommend either oral or injectable Primobolan as a possible bridging compound for this reason... maybe at a too-low-to-do-anything dose of 10mgs it could be used as a bridge. And forget about using injectable Primo to bridge"

Comparative Studies about the influence of MetenoloneAcetate and Mesterolone on hypophysis and male gonads. Arzneimittelforshung. 1970 20(4) 545-7

Thanks Dog,

Any ideas on the best way to run 125mg/week if the amps are 250mg.

Also would like to hear more views on suppresiveness of primo.

o.k. I am reading now, I got confused and somehow went from methenolone to Mesterolone in my research

I'll see what I can find tonight on the suppressive studies of Methenolone and I hope you are right but the profile here shows it is suppressive as I posted. Maybe you can help me and see what you can find

^Where I edited my above post, real world feedback from a guy who's test levels only went down 150ng after 10 weeks. I think he ran a low dose like 300mgs but still shows that its not too suppressive unless he is the exception.

Here is something I have copied from another site:

The Hypothalamus has Androgen, Estrogen, and Progesterone receptors.

Each and EVERY anabolic steroid affects these receptors DIFFERENTLY.

Some steroids affect ALL receptors, while some only affect ONE type of receptor, while others have very little effect on ANY of these receptors.

UNDERSTANDING WHICH steroids affect which receptors, and to WHAT DEGREE, will FULLY enable the steroid user to COMPLETELY and systematically AVOID HPTA SHUTDOWN!

By understanding WHICH steroids cause SHUTDOWN and which steroids do NOT, we can formulate a perfect EXTENDED CYCLE.

Steroids that cause an OVERSATURATION(too many receptors activated) of these various hormone receptors, WILL CAUSE SHUTDOWN.

Steroids that DO NOT CAUSE an OVERSATURATION of ANY of these various hormone receptors, will NOT cause SHUTDOWN!

The Following drugs either DIRECTLY or INDIRECTLY activate ESTROGEN receptors, to varying degrees:

Testosterone
Methandrostenolone
Mathandriol
Oxymetholone
Nandrolone
Boldenone

The Following drugs either DIRECTLY or INDIRECTLY activate PROGESTERONE receptors, to varying degrees:

Nandrolone
Trenbolone
Oxymetholone

The Following drugs activate Androgen receptors, to varying degrees:

Testosterone
Methandrostenolone
Mathandriol
Oxymetholone
Nandrolone
Boldenone
Trenbolone
Halotestin
Oxandrolone
Stanzolol
Chlorodehydromethltestosterone
Methyltestosterone
Methenolone...
(ALL AAS*)

As we can see, the steroids that cause HPTA SHUTDOWN either OVERSATURATE ONE SPECIFIC receptor, or they activate too many TOTAL receptors(Androgen/Estrogen/Progesterone)

For instance, Trenbolone causes HPTA SHUTDOWN because it OVERSATURATES BOTH, the ANDROGEN and the PROGESTERONE receptors.

Testosterone causes SHUTDOWN because it converts to ESTROGEN and DHT, therefore, it oversaturates the Androgen/Estrogen receptors.

As we can ALSO SEE, the steroids that DO NOT cause SHUTDOWN of the HPTA, do NOT oversaturate ANY of the different hormone receptors, and thus, do NOT cause SHUTDOWN.

Methenolone(Primobolan) does not possess ANY Estrogenic or Progestational ACTIVITY WHATSOEVER. It does, by virtue of being an anabolic steroid, posses a SMALL Androgenic component. Because it lacks ANY ESTROGENIC/PROGESTATIONAL component, and it lacks a strong Androgenic component, it WILL NOT CAUSE SHUTDOWN!

Oxandrolone(Anavar) posseses NO Estrogenic/Progestational component either. AND, it also lacks a strong androgenic component. Thus, Anavar will NOT cause shutdown.


By understanding WHICH steroids cause SHUTDOWN and which steroids do NOT, we can formulate a perfect EXTENDED CYCLE.

*It must also be noted, that ANY steroid in LARGE enough DOSAGES for long enough DURATIONS, can cause SHUTDOWN of the HPTA.


NOT ALL ANDROGENS CAUSE SHUTDOWN*

"Shutdown", is defined by a COMPLETE inhibition of the Pituitary/Testes, resulting in a TOTAL cessation of endogenous androgen production.

SOME androgens will only SUPPRESS endogenous androgen production, resulting in a DECREASED testosterone level, but not a complete shutdown. (Tbol, Var, Wistrol, EQ, Dianabol, masteron, proviron, halo, primo)

Very Androgenic/Progestenic/Estrogenic steroids(Tren, Deca, Drol, Test) cause a COMPLETE shutdown of endogenous hormone production.

The distinction between SUPRESSION and SHUTDOWN is utterly important, as steroids that cause LESS supression of endogenous hormones will allow for greater retention of gains upon ending the cycle, and a quicker, easier PCT.

Any more views on topic?

thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xweighted

Thanks Dog,

Any ideas on the best way to run 125mg/week if the amps are 250mg.

Also would like to hear more views on suppresiveness of primo.

---

I have heard of guys storing gear in syringes and just switching out the needles. I would definately post a topic and ask about whether or not this is a good idea before trying it tho.

If nothing else and your set on doing it you could buy a sterile vial and a large syringe and draw several amps into the syringe and inject it all into the vial.

I wouldnt do var and primo honestly...id opt for a winny and primo cycle...but at 15% BF you may want to go with Test prop and Primo...may be a better option. No test does NOT have to be the base of every cycle. Some AAS (19nor groups) you will need test to help keep things like mood, libido, well being, etc... up and not become a member of a the ED club.

Havent actually considered or researched much on a winny/primo cycle but actually have some winny on hand so will look into.

Any reaons why you think primo/prop would be better than prop/var or is it just preference?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by legobricks

I wouldnt do var and primo honestly...id opt for a winny and primo cycle...but at 15% BF you may want to go with Test prop and Primo...may be a better option. No test does NOT have to be the base of every cycle. Some AAS (19nor groups) you will need test to help keep things like mood, libido, well being, etc... up and not become a member of a the ED club.

---

I ran primo acetate at 100mg ed without test and lost all interest in sex and became depressed, so I discontinued after 5 wks. also a friend of mine was bridging with primo and he experienced all kinds of sides. I will never use any kind of aas without test again except for maybe var. better safe than sorry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xweighted

Havent actually considered or researched much on a winny/primo cycle but actually have some winny on hand so will look into.

Any reaons why you think primo/prop would be better than prop/var or is it just preference?

---

primo and winny are an awesome combo and very popular for cutting up. I get shredded on that stack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xweighted

Havent actually considered or researched much on a winny/primo cycle but actually have some winny on hand so will look into.

Any reaons why you think primo/prop would be better than prop/var or is it just preference?

---

Var is too weak IMO. And with prop, not as much water retention as enanthate.

OOOH WOW mx-3.............. has friends.............. who are bigger than me who take lots of test, whoopdy doo .........sory if i insulted you somehow mx but most of us dont want to be 5' 7'' and weigh 280 so you have no point as far as i can tell and as far as running my mouth goes, I'm the one answering his thread with something relevant to his question and your another dime a dozen parrot chirping about test like you can't comprehend the subject here, i know yer just gonna come back at me with some immature threaghtening comments about how you know it all and I ought to shut up, but that's what makes you so fun to talk to,,,,,,,,,,you are predictable.....it's laughable man!!

Yo xweighted, you asked my favorite non test cycle. I don't have a favorite but some of the ones I've enjoyed. Eq and d-bol deca and d-bol eq and turanabol eq deca and hcg primo and turanabol all very good and no recovery problems Deca may be a little too suppressive for most to run without test so that im not recommending but personally its worked fine for me!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sculpture

OOOH WOW mx-3.............. has friends.............. who are bigger than me who take lots of test, whoopdy doo .........sory if i insulted you somehow mx but most of us dont want to be 5' 7'' and weigh 280 so you have no point as far as i can tell and as far as running my mouth goes, I'm the one answering his thread with something relevant to his question and your another dime a dozen parrot chirping about test like you can't comprehend the subject here, i know yer just gonna come back at me with some immature threaghtening comments about how you know it all and I ought to shut up, but that's what makes you so fun to talk to,,,,,,,,,,you are predictable.....it's laughable man!!

---

I made a relevant point in my arguement as to why test should be included in every cycle, because you can experience sides from not running test with compounds that cause suppression. parroting I think not, its just the facts. Im looking out for his well being seeing how I have personal experience and knowledge of what running compounds without test can do to you. you have yet to state any facts on your behalf as to why not running test ok. here are some of mine(loss of libido, depression, prolonged recovery, decreased energy are few.) I would like to hear your side as well.

Sculpture, there is a strict no flaming policy on this board so I advise that you stop or a suspension will follow.

Ok MX. well i havent expirienced any of those side effects from running cycles without test speaking from personal expirience as well and yet you say that your giving me facts because its just the facts.

Now,, if all these things you have to say are actual facts then show me the clear evidence so that I can learn the importance of these facts too. But you can't say "it's just the facts " and expect a guy like me to believe it because so far every trend from religion to science to peoples daily lifestyles that ive taken the time to study for myselff just turned out to be commonly accepted b.s. If you can really show me the evidence I need to see to believe your "facts" then I will be grateful to you for correcting me before i hurt myself running cycles without test. In my countless hours of research I've never seen anything to prove the things you say but anything is possible so show me something I can't deny and I'll accept it.

And I'm very sorry if I came off as flaming you, your opinions are just as valid as mine and just because I'm an aggressive challenging individual deosnt mean i don't respect you, thanks.

Come on bro I'm waiting for all those "FACTS" still............................................. ................................................

Uhuh, yep thought so.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sculpture

Uhuh, yep thought so.......

---

I sent you a pm a couple days ago. it doesn't matter what I show you because some people including yourself are able to use suppressive compounds without having low test related sides so If it doesn't apply to you your still not gonna believe anything I show you. But Im not gonna give advice to someone and tell them if they dont run test they will be fine because you dont know until youve tried and they will be looking at me thinking I gave them bad advice if they can't get thier dick up or have a 3 month long recovery.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sculpture

Come on bro I'm waiting for all those "FACTS" still............................................. ................................................

---

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.

Well, I see your point there MX, I really can't say that everyone can get away with no test in a cycle. Where's the pm you sent me? Are you saying you sent me one to look cool on this board. If you had info. why couldn't you just post it here for all to see. Seems a little suspicious .

Hey big, saying I have a limited understanding doesnt give me any scientific studies to read or anything, it's just another insult used to fill in where you lack the info. studies, (readable information) to SHOW ME. I'm used to this, it's the kinda answer I always get,,,,,,none at all. If you have something to back it up with why in the world wont you show me, you or anybody else I've challenged about this issue. Anybody can say, that's the way it is and you should except it or your a dummy and you don't grasp this with yer limited understanding. Yer right, I'm limited to not believing anyone who says i should believe something just because.