Cycle advice (comments on first cycles, doses, eating, etc.)

[BASK8KACE]

BASK8KACE,
You probably don't remember, but a few weeks ago you gave me some advice on my 1st cutting cycle (4th overall) and I was just wondering if a low-dose cutting cycle would be better.. in your opinion. My other cycles were 1) Test E @ 250mg/wk 2) T400 at 2ml/week and 3) 1-12 Test E @ 250mg/wk..9-14 Winny at 50mg/eod. Now, I feel that I got really good results with very little sides on all of these cycles. I was going to run 1-13 Test E 500mg/wk, 1-12 EQ 400mg/wk, 10-15 winny 50mg/ed. My only goal is to loose bodyfat and lean out. Do you think that half of those doses would accomplish that goal? My diet and workouts have been consistant for close to 7 years. The main reason that I want to do another cycle is because I want to run t3 and don't like the sound of what it does w/o AS. So, do you think that Test E 250mg/wk, EQ 200mg/wk and winny.... maybe 50mg/eod would be benifical? Thanks

If you feel you're doing well on the low doses, I'd stick with them--as long as you feel you're still getting the most out of a cycle with them. However, if you truly have your diet in order and you've grown well on low doses, then there's nothing wrong with increasing your dose a bit to experiment in order to find out what your body's reaction will be on moderate doses (I just don't like to see people increasing doses in order to try to fix a problem casued by diet, which is apparently NOT a problem with you). A weekly dose of 400-500mg enan and 400mg of EQ, is a reasonable amount to run now--in your case.

How are you planning to use the T3? It can strip you of your gains if you're not careful.

[BASK8KACE]

bmwrob,

Just a quick suggestion: Try not to hi-jack threads by veering off the original post topic. You have a thread about your cycle already. Your thread would have been a great place to ask this follow-up question.

Here's a link to your other thread (for those reading the above post):
4th Cycle...1st Cutting Cycle

[bmwrob]

How are you planning to use the T3? It can strip you of your gains if you're not careful.

I will be using a modified form of Mallet's 7/5 split. It will actuall be a 9/5 split... with the extra days being a light ramp up/down in the beginning and end. It will look like this...

day 1.... 1/4 of max
day 2.... 1/2 of max
day 3-7.. max
day 8.....1/2 of max
day 9.....1/4 of max
5 days off.
I have done extensive research on both Mallet's way and Cycleons way and I have deceided to use it this way because I believe that in my case ( 7 years ago I was over 300lbs... got down to 180lbs..and now around 215lbs @ 27yrs and 5'11 13%bf) this will cause the least long-term stress on my thyroid. I will be starting this t3/clen cyle 4 weeks after I start the TEST E/EQ so they have enough time to kicin and prevent any muscle loss.

[bmwrob]

bmwrob,

Just a quick suggestion: Try not to hi-jack threads by veering off the original post topic. You have a thread about your cycle already. Your thread would have been a great place to ask this follow-up question.

Here's a link to your other thread (for those reading the above post):
4th Cycle...1st Cutting Cycle

Thank you very much. I will delete these posts and try to move them to my thread.

[BASK8KACE]

No, you can leave them here, bro. Since they're already up--it was just a side note for the future.

Anyway...it looks like you're good to go. Keep me posted on the progress!

[bmwrob]

No, you can leave them here, bro. Since they're already up--it was just a side note for the future.

Anyway...it looks like you're good to go. Keep me posted on the progress!

I will.... thanks for the advice and the heads-up on the posts.

[conrad]

B-case is right on the money with this low dose cycles advice. i was under the guidence of a top level bodybuilder and he stated that i should use a low dose cycle since it was my first time. I used 250mg of super test 250/and 150mgs of Deca weekly for 12 weeks: i started out at 5'10''/200lbs and finished the cycle weighing 231lbs to be exact. My diet was very much in check 1.0 grams of protien everyday and kept switching from hi-glycemic to low glycemic carbs jus to see how my body would respond and to tell you the truth is was the bomb. When i started out i was at about 10%bf and finished the cycle at about 13% and used femara as my antis, got very lil acne if any..............Just try it sometime if your a newbie such as myself i cant speak for the more advanced users

[BASK8KACE]

Bump.

[Property of Steroid.com]

Read the studies posted above before you get married to low-doses. They just don't work as well as high doses.

[BASK8KACE]

http://forums.steroid.com/showpost.p...85&postcount=1

[BASK8KACE]

Hooker, you forgot to highlight the following in your studies:

"...however, the factors that contribute to variation in an individual's anabolic response to androgens remain unknown."

"Small improvements were noted in all groups but the changes were highly variable."

Regarding weight and strength gains:
"...Except for a consistent weight gain with greater than replacement doses, the detectable changes [casued by changes in dose] were highly variable and relatively small, especially in comparison to the significant alterations which were observed for other markers of androgen action."

There's no reason anyone should use high doses while they are still making good gains on low doses (15-20lbs per cycle).

[Property of Steroid.com]

YEah...how odd....I highlighted the CONCLUSION of each study....thats the part where the researcher/scientist tells you what the study revealed.

[BASK8KACE]

YEah...how odd....I highlighted the CONCLUSION od each study....thats the part where the researcher/scientist tells you what the study revealed.
Isn't that the most relevant part?

In an abstract, all of the comments are quite relevent because it is a summary of the entire study. All of the wording is succint.

If a scientist has discovered something without doubt, s/he will not write "...however, the factors that contribute to variation in an individual's anabolic response to androgens remain unknown." In other words the jury's still out on the point of doses and your studies aren't decisive they are only suggestive.

I'm not arguing whether or not higher doses mean more muscle--because that was never the point of any of my arguements. You've started arguing a point in my threads that was never mentioned by me. If you read through my posts more carefully and less reactionarily, you'll find exactly what I've been saying all along is true.

[BASK8KACE]

I have said that people can gain just as well on low doses as they can on high doses occasionally when I was being lazy about making a larger point. What I've meant by that is a person who can gain 15-20 lbs on low doses is not going to gain all that much more on large doses. He may gain a few pounds more, but he's not going to suddenly gain 40 lbs by doubling his dose. You and I disagree firmly on that point.

Regarding why the pros use mega doses....I've posted a study from the University of Maryland that clearly states why a person must continually raise his doses on long cycles. I'd be willing to bet all the elite stay on gear year-round; hence the need to eventually use high doses.

You've taken my argument off in a completely different path.

You and defintely disagree. We can state our points over and over, but it doesn't look like either of us is going to move. You can pick through my posts and take my comments out of context and analyze them, if you'd like.

...But the idea of my posts remain the same: There's nothing wrong with using lower doses, because you can grow well on them.

[Property of Steroid.com]

5. You asked about the gains or 400mg per week versus 200mg per week of testosterone. No, the gains of 400mg per week do not automatically guarantee twice as much muscle as 200mg per week. AS doses not work like that.

However, if you read the full study of the abstract I posted, you'll see that when comparing 300mgs vs. 600mgs of testosterone , Fat-Free-Mass gained by the 600 group was roughly double that of the 300mg group. This directly contradicts the quote by you above.

[BASK8KACE]

However, if you read the full study of the abstract I posted, you'll see that when comparing 300mgs vs. 600mgs of testosterone, Fat-Free-Mass gained by the 600 group was roughly double that of the 300mg group. This directly contradicts the quote by you above.

Hooker,

You can't soundly extrapolate that to mean that someone who is busting his butt in the gym on 300mg of test per week who makes a lean mass gain of 20 lbs is suddenly going to gain 40 lbs on 600mg. This is where you and I disagree.

Based on your writing, you seem far too intelligent to make that kind of assumption.

I could easily believe that on 600mg a person might gain a few more lbs (2-5lbs.) But, if I'm getting a gain of 20 lbs per cycle on 300mg per week there's no way I'm going to spend twice the money to run 600mg for a few extra pounds.

[BASK8KACE]

BTW...don't take that to mean that by trippling the dose you could suddently gain 10-20 extra pounds.

I firmly disagree that higher dose means significant changes in the amount one can gain. It may increase it, but not by nearly the amount you're suggesting.

However, I DO believe that if you are a bodybuilder who is cycling with little or no breaks between cycles (staying on year round), then you must continue to increase your doses.

So my belief is that the large guys are using more steroids due to cycling for long periods of time, not because more means more gains.

[Property of Steroid.com]

It would seem that you claim that double the dose doesn't mean double the gains...and the study seems to suggest otherwise. Thats All I'm saying.

[BASK8KACE]

It would seem that you claim that double the dose doesn't mean double the gains...and the study seems to suggest otherwise. Thats All I'm saying.

I know. That's the main point on which you and I disagree.

As I said above, I think the reasons the elite bodybuilders use higher doses is more a function of their tendancy to be on long cycles (which requires increasing doses constantly to get more gains) rather than a function of the idea that more gear means more muscle.

[Swifto]

is there such thing as a low dose maintenance cycle? after a high dose cycle?

[Property of Steroid.com]

I know. That's the main point on which you and I disagree.

.

Well...those who are in agreement with me...are in agreement with the above mentioned (published and peer-reviewed) medical studies. You choose not to be......

But that's a factor I'd ask others to consider when evaluating our respective advice and points.

[BASK8KACE]

Well...those who are in agreement with me...are in agreement with the above mentioned (published and peer-reviewed) medical studies. You choose not to be......

But that's a factor I'd ask others to consider when evaluating our respective advice and points.

Hooker,

I don't disagree with the study. I disagree with your extrapolation based on the study, as I clearly explained above.

I think if you spent less time spinning what I write and more time focusing on the points I'm making, you'd come off far less abrassively than you do.

is there such thing as a low dose maintenance cycle? after a high dose cycle?

Yes, that's called staying on a cycle year round. Some also call it "bridging."

[Property of Steroid.com]

My goal isn't to come off more or less abrasively. My goal is to provide the best, most scientifically supported and well researched advice that I can. Usually, this means posting advice contrary to yours.

[MR PHATT ASS]

...........I love the informative debates....we all learn, no flaming..and makes peeps want to post topics for further debates and discuss other issues..I personaly seem to be intune with low dosages as i gonna start another one in late jan/early feb...

[BASK8KACE]

My goal isn't to come off more or less abrasively. My goal is to provide the best, most scientifically supported and well researched advice that I can. Usually, this means posting advice contrary to yours.

Hooker,

You're being nasty for no reason. None of the other MODs on this board behave like this.

I don't mind that we disagree, but your behavior is disappointing, considering what I've grown to expect from this board.

[Property of Steroid.com]

I post about optimal dosages and optimal usage of drugs. i'm not married to high or low doses*...I'm not concerned with whether I'm being naughty or nice. I'm concerned with providing accurate information. I do my research and back up my claims.


*For example, I've often mentioned and cited the East German studies which have shown .125mgs of anavar per kg of bdyweight is optimal...or the AIDS research showing that over 100mgs of anadrol per day increases sides w/o increasing weight gains, etc...and on the other side of the coin is this thead where I've shown dose respondant curves for testosterone , and how higher doses produce more gains...etc... OPTIMAL advice is my goal.

"People who settle for small gains are usually small, both downstairs and upstairs"

~Dan Duchaine

[BASK8KACE]

Just because you disagree with me doesn't justify your position. Nor is your advice optimal.

Despite not being concerned with how you come across, you do represent the board since you're a MOD, so it's something you should consider. Furthermore, your tactics do not encourage reasonable discussion of topics.

[Property of Steroid.com]

People will be able to come to their own conclusions on whether my advice is optimal. I suspect that the weight of the studies I post will bear more heavily on that decision than anything else I say.

[BASK8KACE]

People will be able to come to their own conclusions on whether my advice is optimal. I suspect that the weight of the studies I post will bear more heavily on that decision than anything else I say.

The studies are fine. But, the conclusions you've drawn based on them are a bit excessive.

[Property of Steroid.com]

My Conclusion:

a higher dose means more gains, especially with Testosterone

Now the conclusion of the Scientist who conducted the study I posted:

"In conclusion, changes in testosterone concentrations in young men are associated with dose-dependent and region-specific changes in AT and lean body mass in the appendices and trunk."

Once again, My conclusion:

a higher dose means more gains, especially with Testosterone

Now the conclusion of the Scientist who conducted the second study I posted:

"Hence, the anabolic response of healthy, young men to exogenous testosterone administration can largely be predicted by the testosterone dose".

So...are my conclusions excessive?

[BASK8KACE]

Also quoted from your studies:
"...however, the factors that contribute to variation in an individual's anabolic response to androgens remain unknown."

"Small improvements were noted in all groups but the changes were highly variable."

Regarding weight and strength gains:
"...Except for a consistent weight gain with greater than replacement doses, the detectable changes [casued by changes in dose] were highly variable and relatively small, especially in comparison to the significant alterations which were observed for other markers of androgen action."

[BASK8KACE]

So...are my conclusions excessive?

Earlier, you said that by doubling your dose you can double your gains. That is what I disagree with and find excessive.

I have no problem with the studies.

This has gotten ridiculous. You're obviously not interested in truly discussing the issues.

[Jackman]

so hooker a friend of mine gained 25 ilb (20 pounds of lean muscle) on 250mg of sust a week. If he did 1g your telling me he would of gained 80 ilb?

[Property of Steroid.com]

I've been asked to lay off B8K by the owner, and I'm respecting that request.

[BASK8KACE]

I've been asked to lay off B8K by the owner, and I'm respecting that request.

I wonder why. Probably because the MODS at this board don't act the way you do:
1. Cycle advice (comments on first cycles, doses, eating, etc.)

[Jackman]

so hooker a friend of mine gained 25 ilb (20 pounds of lean muscle) on 250mg of sust a week. If he did 1g your telling me he would of gained 80 ilb?

i still need an answer just to clarify this

[Property of Steroid.com]

Well...originally I was talking about doubling a dose...not quadroupling it. So I don't know what 4x the dose would do to a person who has already had results never before recorded in any study ever performed on the response from 250mgs of testosterone . He's an anomoly...not statistically relevant, I'd imagine, to the veracity of the studies or my claims on dose-respondant curves. There isn't an infinate mathmatical equation here. We were talking about 200mgs vs. 400mgs, and certainly the research I've provided strongly suggests one would have double the gains when comparing those numbers, and at least up to 600mgs. We aren't really within our rights to begin speculation on 4x a given dose, or even doses above 600mgs, necessarily.

I suppose if you need to know how much he'd gain, you can follow the formula provided within the body of the study I've already cited. It provides a mathmatical equation to determine average weight gain from a given amount of Test enanthenate, based on a variety of numbers and formulas. But as I said, his results are already not really within any sort of norm anyone's ever looked at in a study. They won't work in your particular (1 in a billion) example.

FYI, Jack: I can't read B8K's posts anymore, since I put him on my ignore list. I've already put things in the simplest terms, and if one can not understand them as such, then they won't be understood at all...

[wolfyEVH]

you've got tons of great info bask8kace, but here are some questions i have.
first of all, hooker has been showing refrences to his points where you have not. It seems you posted this info just as opinion because there is nothing to back up your claim about low dose cycles. Yeah, the may work for some people if they have a great diet as well, but I have heard only you, and a handful of people say they work where everyone else does 400-500mg of test a week. Also this quote here:

If you read my other posts, you'll find that from chatting/reading/discussing, I've found that 400mg per week of testosterone (enan or cyp) tends to yeild 20-24 lbs in 10-12 weeks, while 250mgs per week tends to yeild 15-20lbs in 10-12 weeks.

How do you know that 400mg a week will yeild 20-24 lbs in 10-12 weeks, and why do you specifically have "24" instead of a well rounded number like 25. Same for 250mg, you say it tends to yeild 15-20 lbs.

Now if there was evidence that low dose cycles would yeild these results to EVERYBODY who tries it, then there would be no need to do more than that. People do more than that because they feel if they only gain 15 lbs at the end of the cycle where they really wanted 20. So they will automatically start off with 400-500mg/week to get the most results. Not everyone here is able to have a really REALLY strict diet either because of jobs, school, income, and everything else in their personal life. I personally will never go over 600mg of test in my life. You might get a lot more followers if you said that anything over 500-600mg/week is worthless because no one wants to take their chances on the really low dose cycles. just my 2 cents

[Property of Steroid.com]

first of all, hooker has been showing refrences to his points where you have not.

I was writing a suicide note until I read this...

Thank you, Wolfy....I thought nobody was listening.... It means alot to me that someone totally "got" what I was saying....man....thanks.

[MIKE_XXL]

I am here with Bask8kace...my first cycle was 250mg of sust per week for 10 weeks...gains 20lbs or so...many times after i have doubled, tripled and have gone as far as 2000mg per week, and my gains have cirtanly not multiplied in accordance to my dose...i think for advanced person using 1000mg is more then enough to gain substencial amount of muscle, and doubling the dose will graetly increase the side effects and the muscle growth will be just slightly elevated, the little bit of extra gains are not worth the extra risk inolved, for a beginer i would recomend 400-500mg per week...as Bask8 said THE DIET AND INTENSITY IS THE KEY...genetics play a rola as well...but if you don't eat you won't grow...that's it, it's as simple as that...so play it safe take lower doses and you still will gain more then enough with proper training and diet...XXL