BF% and Starting a Cycle

**canada76** · 10-18-2010, 09:27 PM

How important is is to be ~15% BF before you cycle. My goal with gaining muscle/mass is to lose body far through strong workouts and increased muscle mass. Ofcourse a proper diet and mild cardio is included.

I guess my question, is there really anything wrong with a bulking up cycle with a high BF%?

**SlimmerMe** · 10-18-2010, 09:30 PM

Welcome...maybe gyno problems?

**canada76** · 10-18-2010, 09:35 PM

I have mild B**** tits, but after 8 weeks at the gym 5 times a week they are going down fast... oddly enough, one more than the other. I guess on the board I'm on the flip side of most posting and don't have less than 15% BF but am still giving it 110%!

**scotty51312** · 10-18-2010, 09:35 PM

More bodyfat leads to more estrogen conversion and possibly more side effects. I've scene some people here even mods that have cycled as high as 18 percent. Being at a lower bodyfat will also help you see gyno setting in faster. If you are a powerlifter or strong man competitor type I guess i could understand cycling between 15 and 18% But you're just at a higher risk of sides.

**canada76** · 10-18-2010, 09:42 PM

Thx Scott.. I will do some research on what best to add in to my cycle or do PCT to offset these greater gyno sides.

**canada76** · 10-18-2010, 10:05 PM

Relative Link and great informaiton on GYNO - BF% and what to do.

http://forums.steroid.com/showthread...highlight=gyno

**pepous** · 10-19-2010, 10:10 AM

May I ask you, what BF% do you think this is? I am only 80 kg

I usualy dont look like this ... it is after training ...

**Swifto** · 10-19-2010, 10:19 AM

15-18%.

I have cycled as high as 20%, or perhaps more.

If your bf% is higher you must control estrogen due to the increase in aromotase activity (adipose tissue).

However, exogenous testosetrone will decrease fat storage (lipid uptake), increase fat release (lipolysis) and increase fat oxidation.

Too many people on here get caught up with "your bf% is too high to cycle" without taking into account what effect exogenous testosterone (and almost other androgen) have on the body as a net effect.

**canada76** · 10-19-2010, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by Swifto

15-18%.

I have cycled as high as 20%, or perhaps more.

If your bf% is higher you must control estrogen due to the increase in aromotase activity (adipose tissue).

However, exogenous testosetrone will decrease fat storage (lipid uptake), increase fat release (lipolysis) and increase fat oxidation.

Too many people on here get caught up with "your bf% is too high to cycle" without taking into account what effect exogenous testosterone (and almost other androgen) have on the body as a net effect.

Thx Swift.. I had another thread on what type of cycle I should look at and the concencus was that I shouldnt cycle at all until I am below 20% BF. I think a lot of people come on here and say "I want to use gear to lose fat".. That wasn't the case with my posts, what I want to acomplish is an increase in muscle/strength while I work hard to lower my BF%. To be honest, I am completly OK with going a non AAS route and I think I will until I trim 8% BF or so.. I figure I am at around 25-27% now.

**Swifto** · 10-19-2010, 02:28 PM

Originally Posted by canada76

Thx Swift.. I had another thread on what type of cycle I should look at and the concencus was that I shouldnt cycle at all until I am below 20% BF. I think a lot of people come on here and say "I want to use gear to lose fat".. That wasn't the case with my posts, what I want to acomplish is an increase in muscle/strength while I work hard to lower my BF%. To be honest, I am completly OK with going a non AAS route and I think I will until I trim 8% BF or so.. I figure I am at around 25-27% now.

Well that is a little high IMO. Well it is high.

Although I've said what I have said, you will see better gains at around 10-15% IMHO. There is a limit to what I have said and 27% is too high.

Unless your a power lifter, have a thyroid issue, are in a sport where added FM (fat mass) is needed, your diet, training, cardio or all of them are not on point. They (possibly all) need to be addressed before cycling to get the most out of your cycle.

**bodybuilder** · 10-19-2010, 02:36 PM

I agree with swifto bf% is stressed a little to much IMO if you are under 20% and control estrogen with an AI during cycle you should be fine. With that being said i do believe you would see better results if you were 15% or lower pree cycle. Just my two cents.

**canada76** · 10-19-2010, 03:05 PM

Originally Posted by pitbulllock

I agree with swifto bf% is stressed a little to much IMO if you are under 20% and control estrogen with an AI during cycle you should be fine. With that being said i do believe you would see better results if you were 15% or lower pree cycle. Just my two cents.

I agree. Good advice guys, and thx for looking out. For now I'll continue to read up and work my ass off to lower my BF.

**Epic Ed** · 10-19-2010, 03:10 PM

I've posted this before:

Originally Posted by Epic Ed

I understand the rationale behind not encouraging AAS usage if body fat is high, but I think people tend to get a little too dogmatic about using that as a defining measure of whether someone should or shouldn't run a cycle. Assuming someone has made a commitment to the diet aspect of the program, I don't see any reason why running a moderate dose of test ... wouldn't be beneficial to the weight loss program. Gaining muscle mass is conducive to burning fat. I'm not suggesting someone at 25-30% BF should run a cycle and ignore their diet, which I understand happens all too frequently and can put AAS users in a bad light (risks and side effects to the user aside). I'm just saying it's not a tragic error in judgement to be committed to losing weight while running a reasonable cycle. Those with higher body fat will have to keep a closer eye on blood pressure and estrogen related side effects. So be it. We're all adults making decisions to take risks to accomplish our goals and I personally think telling someone not to cycle simply based on a body fat percentage is painting with too broad a brush.

**40plusnewbie** · 10-19-2010, 04:48 PM

I'm running a heavy cycle for my 2nd cycle and was on the wrong end of 20% bf and prob just under that now. I'm just using intermittent dosing with letro along the way as a precaution and am not seeing problems/sides at all (except for some increased acne, but not bad). I wouldn't encourage anyone else to do it but I make my own choices and things are working out just fine for me, pretty decent body recomp about 1 month into the cycle.

If one knows the risks and how to manage them, and does so, what is the real risk? FYI in addition to test cyp I'm running var at 100mg/day or thereabouts, my bp- 127 over 77 on cycle. Off cycle it is 108-110 over 66. I'm also using crushed fina pellets trans-dermally with dmso, not sure how much I'm actually adsorbing, using 2 peptides to encourage gh bursts, and hcg to keep my nuts.

My muscles are growing very nicely, bf is dropping, and the biggest side I'm getting is from the var with the little jump in bp and the impact on my lipid profile, however with a cholesterol level of 136 I'm not too worried about having a heart attack from being on var for 9 weeks.

If I was in my mid to late 20's like a lot of u guys I wouldn't cycle so aggressively, but at age 43 I want to build my body to the point I'm happy with it using steroids to get there quicker. If I die before I'm done the bf pressure ppl can say "I told u so" but if I'm done in 5 yrs or less and my body is no worse for the wear and I'm lookin like a college line backer in my mid to late 40's I will be quite pleased. Again, I'm not suggesting anyone else do this and I have a great underlying health profile (i.e. my cholesterol level, etc) but I am going to get where I want to be faster taking an aggressive route rather than a standard route that is automatically regurgitated to everyone as if ppl are programed to be on auto pilot.

**scotty51312** · 10-19-2010, 06:46 PM

Originally Posted by Swifto

15-18%.

Too many people on here get caught up with "your bf% is too high to cycle" without taking into account what effect exogenous testosterone (and almost other androgen) have on the body as a net effect.

Agree^^ I try to be objective about it. When you see powerlifters and a lot of strenght athletes you know they're not 15%bf or less but you also know they didn't accumulate mass like that without some gear. To me there is a limit and for me that limit would be more like "if people see you when you walk in the door of the gym and without knowing you already know you're there to lift and not there for the excersise bike to work off your spare tire then you're within the standard i would say is ok to cycle" But thats just my humble opinion and I wouldn't wanna step on any toes when giving advice here

**MACHINE5150** · 10-19-2010, 06:52 PM

i started my cycle at 22% bf.. and just got it tested again today 8 weeks into cycle and am now 19%.. gained 19lbs muscle and lost 4lbs of fat.. i noticed that the water retention was more of an issue on this cycle then what it was when i did my first cycle years ago and started at a lower BF.. but i just take arimidex at .5 EOD and the water retention is gone.. so, it is not that important.. as long as you keep an eye on the sides of estrogen, and have some arimidex on hand

**MACHINE5150** · 10-19-2010, 06:55 PM

i would say you are 15-17%.. you should incorporate some dumbell bench into your workouts, you have a good frame to build on, but your chest is lacking