Why are YOU still using clomid?

[Vullfromsc]

Fareston is a Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulator (SERM), not unlike its more popular cousins Nolvadex and Clomid. Just as we see with Nolvadex, Fareston is used to treat breast cancer in post-menopausal women. It does this by exerting estrogen antagonistic effects in certain tissue, most notably, breast tissue. This is actually the same mechanism of action found in Nolvadex. This is why Nolvadex is often recommended to bodybuilders who are trying to avoid gynocomastia (growth of breast tissue in males). SERMs, in addition, have several other well known effects in men, which are not simply limited to preventing the abnormal growth of breast tissue.

At the hypothalamus and pituitary, estrogen acts in cooperation with the male body’s negative feedback loop to send a signal to decrease the secretion of LH, and when LH secretion is lowered, so are natural testosterone levels . SERMs, like Fareston, possibly act as an estrogen antagonist in the hypothalamus and pituitary, in order to increase testosterone production. Thus, although it hasn’t been studied to any great degree, it’s highly likely that Fareston is capable of increasing testosterone in the same way that Nolvadex it, as it’s androgenicity:estrogenicity ratio is 5x that of Nolvadex(1). It may also be better than Nolvadex for reasons that are of particular interest to steroid using athletes and bodybuilders.

Fareston differs from Nolvadex in several ways, however- even though it’s very similar to it in others. Firstly, the risk of certain side effects (although relatively rare with Nolvadex) is actually quite a bit lower with Fareston.However unlikely these risks are in the first place, the risk of stroke, pulmonary embolism, and cataract is probably lower with Fareston than with Nolvadex. This is going to be of interest to people who have issues with “floaters” in their vision, which is sometimes caused by Nolvadex and Clomid, as this product may represent significantly less occular toxicity. It also differs slightly from Nolvadex in its potent with regards to improving lipid (cholesterol) profiles. In terms of improving bone mineral density, Fareston is roughly equal to Nolvadex.(2)

Although anecdotal evidence on this compound is rare, bodybuilders who have already experimented with this stuff seem satisfied. In my estimation, it would seem to be a more potent and safer alternative to Nolvadex, for those who are worried about side effects. I’m also predicting that it may provide a greater increase in LH and therefore testosterone levels, in men when compared to Nolvadex (when an appropriate dose of each is utilized). This makes its use a strong possibility for PCT in the future, when studies on its ability to elevate testosterone is more fully studied and understood.

Fareston would also make a welcome addition to a cycle where Cholesterol issues may be a concern, or where something slightly stronger than Nolvadex may be required to prevent gyno.

References:

1. Breast Cancer Re Treat. 1990 Aug;16 Suppl:S3-7. Introduction to toremifene. Kangas L.

2. Breast 2006 Apr;15(2):142-57. Epub 2005 Nov 9.Toremifene: An evaluation of its safety profile. Harvey HA, Kimura , MHajba A


pulled this article off isteroid

so why are people still recommending clomid with nolvadex, instead of torem solo or torem/nolva?

clomid is VERY outdated and toxic, i'm just not sure why torem has not caught on more on this forum..

any input?

[Neevor]

They do different things. Here ya go bud... read up.

Pheedno's PCT

One more..

http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=349581

[Vullfromsc]

thanks for those, i hadn't read the second one before.

but i'm still wondering why torem is so rarely used

[Atomini]

I don't use clomid and never have. I never reccomend it either. Nolvadex is far better.

But you DO realize that toremifene is so new on the scene that not all of its effects and attributes have been discovered yet? And it could very well turn out that toremifene has far worse effects than nolvadex or clomid? I don't believe it does, but I am just throwing this out there.

Too many times some new compound is discovered or something, and what ends up happening is everyone claims it is far less damaging/toxic than whatever is currently being used. You don't know that. Nolvadex has been tried, tested, and true. And has almost 30 or 40 years of use and testing behind it to back its effectiveness. Toremifene does not have this.

As far as we are concerned in any case with nolvadex, we know it has carcinogenic effects and it has been documented in studies on breast cancer patients. But you have to pay attention to detail here. In all of the studies mentioned, these women were on nolvadex for months and years. The average AAS user is NOT going to be using nolva or clomid for years, but only for an extremely tiny 4 week PCT period. That's a piss in the ocean compared to the context of medical use of clomid and/or nolvadex. Doses may be different as well.

Once again, the difference between use and abuse, and one must also pay attention to the CONTEXT in which these things are used in their different settings before jumping to conclusions.

[Vullfromsc]

I don't use clomid and never have. I never reccomend it either. Nolvadex is far better.

But you DO realize that toremifene is so new on the scene that not all of its effects and attributes have been discovered yet? And it could very well turn out that toremifene has far worse effects than nolvadex or clomid? I don't believe it does, but I am just throwing this out there.

Too many times some new compound is discovered or something, and what ends up happening is everyone claims it is far less damaging/toxic than whatever is currently being used. You don't know that. Nolvadex has been tried, tested, and true. And has almost 30 or 40 years of use and testing behind it to back its effectiveness. Toremifene does not have this.

As far as we are concerned in any case with nolvadex, we know it has carcinogenic effects and it has been documented in studies on breast cancer patients. But you have to pay attention to detail here. In all of the studies mentioned, these women were on nolvadex for months and years. The average AAS user is NOT going to be using nolva or clomid for years, but only for an extremely tiny 4 week PCT period. That's a piss in the ocean compared to the context of medical use of clomid and/or nolvadex. Doses may be different as well.

Once again, the difference between use and abuse, and one must also pay attention to the CONTEXT in which these things are used in their different settings before jumping to conclusions.

good points, and i like that picture haha..

torem is fda approved for the same thing as clomid and nolva are though

these drugs had to go through so much testing for their actual clinical uses, and i understand that. likewise for their PCT uses.. but shouldn't we be more willing to test out these drugs?

the FEW things i have read about this and the even FEWER personal experiences i have read are all very positive

[Swifto]

Fareston is a Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulator (SERM), not unlike its more popular cousins Nolvadex and Clomid. Just as we see with Nolvadex, Fareston is used to treat breast cancer in post-menopausal women. It does this by exerting estrogen antagonistic effects in certain tissue, most notably, breast tissue. This is actually the same mechanism of action found in Nolvadex. This is why Nolvadex is often recommended to bodybuilders who are trying to avoid gynocomastia (growth of breast tissue in males). SERMs, in addition, have several other well known effects in men, which are not simply limited to preventing the abnormal growth of breast tissue.

At the hypothalamus and pituitary, estrogen acts in cooperation with the male body’s negative feedback loop to send a signal to decrease the secretion of LH, and when LH secretion is lowered, so are natural testosterone levels . SERMs, like Fareston, possibly act as an estrogen antagonist in the hypothalamus and pituitary, in order to increase testosterone production. Thus, although it hasn’t been studied to any great degree, it’s highly likely that Fareston is capable of increasing testosterone in the same way that Nolvadex it, as it’s androgenicity:estrogenicity ratio is 5x that of Nolvadex(1). It may also be better than Nolvadex for reasons that are of particular interest to steroid using athletes and bodybuilders.

Fareston differs from Nolvadex in several ways, however- even though it’s very similar to it in others. Firstly, the risk of certain side effects (although relatively rare with Nolvadex) is actually quite a bit lower with Fareston.However unlikely these risks are in the first place, the risk of stroke, pulmonary embolism, and cataract is probably lower with Fareston than with Nolvadex. This is going to be of interest to people who have issues with “floaters” in their vision, which is sometimes caused by Nolvadex and Clomid, as this product may represent significantly less occular toxicity. It also differs slightly from Nolvadex in its potent with regards to improving lipid (cholesterol) profiles. In terms of improving bone mineral density, Fareston is roughly equal to Nolvadex.(2)

Although anecdotal evidence on this compound is rare, bodybuilders who have already experimented with this stuff seem satisfied. In my estimation, it would seem to be a more potent and safer alternative to Nolvadex, for those who are worried about side effects. I’m also predicting that it may provide a greater increase in LH and therefore testosterone levels, in men when compared to Nolvadex (when an appropriate dose of each is utilized). This makes its use a strong possibility for PCT in the future, when studies on its ability to elevate testosterone is more fully studied and understood.

Fareston would also make a welcome addition to a cycle where Cholesterol issues may be a concern, or where something slightly stronger than Nolvadex may be required to prevent gyno.

References:

1. Breast Cancer Re Treat. 1990 Aug;16 Suppl:S3-7. Introduction to toremifene. Kangas L.

2. Breast 2006 Apr;15(2):142-57. Epub 2005 Nov 9.Toremifene: An evaluation of its safety profile. Harvey HA, Kimura , MHajba A


pulled this article off isteroid

so why are people still recommending clomid with nolvadex, instead of torem solo or torem/nolva?

clomid is VERY outdated and toxic, i'm just not sure why torem has not caught on more on this forum..

any input?

Whoever wrote this cant interpret studies, nor have the seen the most recent research.

This kind of blows a f*ck off hole in that article.

In a recent study done on Tamox, Tore and Rolax comparing HPTA restoration. Tamoxifen came out on top.

In 8 weeks, 20mg/ED of Tamoxifen increased LH from 4.54 to 7.73 and Test from 496.59 to 835.06. After two months, 60mg/day of Toremifene increased LH from 4.05 to 5.05 and Test from 496.59 to 709.79. From my PCT Sticky.

Tamoxifen is king.

[Vullfromsc]

Whoever wrote this cant interpret studies, nor have the seen the most recent research.

This kind of blows a f*ck off hole in that article.

In a recent study done on Tamox, Tore and Rolax comparing HPTA restoration. Tamoxifen came out on top.

In 8 weeks, 20mg/ED of Tamoxifen increased LH from 4.54 to 7.73 and Test from 496.59 to 835.06. After two months, 60mg/day of Toremifene increased LH from 4.05 to 5.05 and Test from 496.59 to 709.79. From my PCT Sticky.

Tamoxifen is king.

alright, well that puts an end to my speculation.. lol

[Swifto]

And by the way, I suggest and use Tore/Tamox with a Tore frontload.

Unless the user prefers Clomid and if they do, its still very effective in some.

[Swifto]

alright, well that puts an end to my speculation.. lol

Sorry to kill your thread, but that article is outdated/wrong mate.

[Vullfromsc]

And by the way, I suggest and use Tore/Tamox with a Tore frontload.

Unless the user prefers Clomid and if they do, its still very effective in some.

what is the exact protocol?

week 1 torem 120mg ed tamox 40mg ed
week 2 torem 60mg ed tamox 20mg ed
week 3 torem 60mg ed tamox 20mg ed
week 4 torem 60mg ed tamox 20mg ed

?

thanks for your input swifto

edit: i read your pct thread but i'm not sure if i'm interpreting it right for the dosages

[Swifto]

wk 1-6 Tore 60mg/ED (120mg/ED first 14 days)
wk 1-6 Tamox 20mg/ED

[Vullfromsc]

wk 1-6 Tore 60mg/ED (120mg/ED first 14 days)
wk 1-6 Tamox 20mg/ED

thanks a lot man, much appreciated. i really want to understand pct better

[Swifto]

Read my sticky and my HCG thread. I explain the basics.

[Atomini]

Toremifene seems also more expensive than tamoxifen as well.

Coincidentally, I originally wanted to use toremifene for the cycle I just started but my source was out of stock. I waited a few weeks to see if he'd get it back in stock and so I was too eager to start my cycle and just went for the nolvadex . I'm glad I did, because this is very reassurring.

Though i've heard that if you go 120mg per day instead of 60mg per day of toremifene, you get better recovery during PCT. But then you'd have to use more and hence buy more... so you're right, nolva wins out. Tried, tested, and true.

[Swifto]

Toremifene seems also more expensive than tamoxifen as well.

Coincidentally, I originally wanted to use toremifene for the cycle I just started but my source was out of stock. I waited a few weeks to see if he'd get it back in stock and so I was too eager to start my cycle and just went for the nolvadex . I'm glad I did, because this is very reassurring.

Though i've heard that if you go 120mg per day instead of 60mg per day of toremifene, you get better recovery during PCT. But then you'd have to use more and hence buy more... so you're right, nolva wins out. Tried, tested, and true.

Am I ever wrong?

[stevey_6t9]

Whoever wrote this cant interpret studies, nor have the seen the most recent research.

This kind of blows a f*ck off hole in that article.

In a recent study done on Tamox, Tore and Rolax comparing HPTA restoration. Tamoxifen came out on top.

In 8 weeks, 20mg/ED of Tamoxifen increased LH from 4.54 to 7.73 and Test from 496.59 to 835.06. After two months, 60mg/day of Toremifene increased LH from 4.05 to 5.05 and Test from 496.59 to 709.79. From my PCT Sticky.

Tamoxifen is king.

i understand that nolva in that study boosted LH and test, but what happens after cessation of its use? wouldnt you need a follow up study on the same subjects to determine 4 weeks later which subjects HPTA was restored more rather then which SERM initially boosted levels.

[Standby]

Am I ever wrong?

i like that

[alpenguy]

Am I ever wrong?

You are reaching superhuman status. Thanks for your hard work and sharing. Although, I do have a question that has been bothering me for quite sometime( other than the multitude of HCG questions I have had)

It seems many members whom give advice here on the relentless " what do I do now?" quote the norm for pct serms,
Clomid 100/50/50/20
Nolva 40/40/20/20, and so on, yet most of the time the OP's thread does not state the actual amount of compounds used. Yet the same is suggested. I, have, but will not take Clomid, just cant handle it. But i have taken Nolva for years. But in a fashion that works with amounts and duration. I m no pro, but it would be welcomed to see such an 'amortization' if you will, on pct vs. aas usage.

[alpenguy]

i understand that nolva in that study boosted LH and test, but what happens after cessation of its use? wouldnt you need a follow up study on the same subjects to determine 4 weeks later which subjects HPTA was restored more rather then which SERM initially boosted levels.

This is also a very good point. And how do we know what SERMs work better with different esters, orals, etc?

[e.nergie]

good points, and i like that picture haha..

torem is fda approved for the same thing as clomid and nolva are though

these drugs had to go through so much testing for their actual clinical uses, and i understand that. likewise for their PCT uses.. but shouldn't we be more willing to test out these drugs?

the FEW things i have read about this and the even FEWER personal experiences i have read are all very positive

At the same time though, there are many products that have proven uses but the respective companies/etc who developed the product dont have the funds to get FDA approval aka seaspure

[freakinhuge]

will definitely give torem a try, but I have always used the clomid and nolva, It alwys worked for me.

[Swifto]

i understand that nolva in that study boosted LH and test, but what happens after cessation of its use? wouldnt you need a follow up study on the same subjects to determine 4 weeks later which subjects HPTA was restored more rather then which SERM initially boosted levels.

These studies usually have follow ups at 8, 12 and 24 weeks. I will look at the full paper.

i like that

I am wrong, I was being cocky!

You are reaching superhuman status. Thanks for your hard work and sharing. Although, I do have a question that has been bothering me for quite sometime( other than the multitude of HCG questions I have had)

It seems many members whom give advice here on the relentless " what do I do now?" quote the norm for pct serms,
Clomid 100/50/50/20
Nolva 40/40/20/20, and so on, yet most of the time the OP's thread does not state the actual amount of compounds used. Yet the same is suggested. I, have, but will not take Clomid, just cant handle it. But i have taken Nolva for years. But in a fashion that works with amounts and duration. I m no pro, but it would be welcomed to see such an 'amortization' if you will, on pct vs. aas usage.

Ha ha... Thanks.

You got me a little confused, but are you refering to the compound and their dosages changing with the various AAS used and their doses?

[Neevor]

torem is fda approved for the same thing as clomid and nolva are though

these drugs had to go through so much testing for their actual clinical uses, and i understand that. likewise for their PCT uses..

Oh yeah, cause the stuff approved by the FDA is always safe. Like an approval stamp from God really. Hey hold on one sec, I gotta light my cig..