Atomini's all-you-need-to-know about TREN and how to use it effectively thread!

[noon]

Great informational piece
thanks

[Esculptor]

Stanozolol é um derivado do DHT, 17AA, ação anti-progestênica e possivelmente anti-estrogênica [1], classe 2 (se liga fracamento ao AR), e também poderoso na redução dos níveis de SHBG.

Sua ação anti-progestênica faz com que seja uma droga eficaz para combater os colaterais progestênicos de drogas da família 19-NOR (deca , trembo), como uma possível ginecomastia por aumento da prolactina (-1 na escala Haluch) [2].


is in Portuguese.

Sorry me.My English level is not high, so do not translate

[Atomini]

how could you know which its coming from?

There is no possible way of knowing with absolute certainty. You can, however, use deductive reasoning to get a general idea.

If you get a bout of acne on a certain part of your body that remains pretty consistant while you're on cycle, and you rub Nizoral 2% on the area on a daily basis and the acne clears up within a few weeks, then it is most likely androgen-related.

If you are using a very low dose test with a high dose of an anabolic steroid that is non-aromatizable (such as tren , or masteron , or primo, etc.) and you tend to begin breaking out, then it could most likely be androgen-related.

[Atomini]

Stanozolol é um derivado do DHT, 17AA, ação anti-progestênica e possivelmente anti-estrogênica [1], classe 2 (se liga fracamento ao AR), e também poderoso na redução dos níveis de SHBG.

Sua ação anti-progestênica faz com que seja uma droga eficaz para combater os colaterais progestênicos de drogas da família 19-NOR (deca , trembo), como uma possível ginecomastia por aumento da prolactina (-1 na escala Haluch) [2].


is in Portuguese.

Sorry me.My English level is not high, so do not translate

I used an online translator to translate it. This is what I got:

Stanozolol is a derivative of DHT, 17AA, action anti-progestênica and possibly anti-estrogênica [1], class 2 (connects fracamento to the AIR), and also powerful in reducing the levels of SHBG.Its anti-progestênica action makes it an effective drug to combat the drug progestênicos side 19-NOR family (deca, trembo), as a possible Gynecomastia by increased prolactin ( -1 in scale Haluch) [2].

Can you provide me with the studies that it cites? I need to see the raw data (the studies) to see the details behind the claims that it is an anti-prolactin/anti-progestin. I'm not saying the claims are wrong or right. They may very well be correct about it being an anti-prolactin, but it may be so minimal that it doesn't do a very good job. I need to see the data in the actual medical studies where they observed this effect.

[Esculptor]

Unfortunately not. =/

This was an excerpt from an article that caught on a Brazilian forum

But already followed some people who carried out the tests and examinations made​​.

Using something like 30mg of winstrol (oral version) prolactin levels remained controlled.

[Atomini]

Unfortunately not. =/

This was an excerpt from an article that caught on a Brazilian forum

But already followed some people who carried out the tests and examinations made​​.

Using something like 30mg of winstrol (oral version) prolactin levels remained controlled.

Okay, I THINK I have located at least one of the cited references, and it is:

Agents Actions. 1994 Mar;41(1-2):37-43.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?t...2)%3A37-43.%20

Stanozolol inhibited fibroblast growth factor (FGF)-stimulated DNA synthesis in both the skin and synovial fibroblasts, showing that both cell types were capable of responding to the compound. Competitive binding assays indicated that stanozolol bound specifically to both the skin and synovial fibroblasts. Binding of stanozolol to both cell types could be partially displaced by progesterone, indicating that stanozolol binds to the progesterone receptor. Immunocytochemical studies confirmed the presence of progesterone receptors on skin and synovial fibroblasts. However, progesterone failed to elicit any response with respect to collagenase production in either cell type. Nortestosterone, dexamethasone and 17 beta-oestradiol had no effect on binding of stanozolol to either cell type. These results indicate that the inhibition of DNA synthesis by stanozolol is elicited through the progesterone receptor. The effects of stanozolol on collagenase and PGE2 production are mediated by a different receptor, present on skin but not synovial fibroblasts, and as yet unidentified.

Alright, so what this is telling us is that Winstrol seems to have an effect on progesterone receptors in skin tissue. There is nothing to state that it has any effect on progesterone receptors elsewhere in the body, but either way this is not the main problem here.... Presumably we are supposed to believe Winstrol has some kind of anti-progestin capability because it blocked FGF stimulated DNA synthesis. The effect on DNA synthesis was measured by thymidine uptake. Less thymidine uptake means less DNA synthesis. A significant inhibition of thymidine uptake was seen in response to stanozolol in both cell types. The steroids nortestosterone, oxymetholone, trenbolone , and progesterone itself were also tested for their effect on thymidine uptake to determine whether the effects of stanozolol on DNA synthesis were unique. These other compounds also inhibited DNA synthesis in both cell types.

In other words, Winstrol holds THE EXACT SAME effect as progesterone on progesterone receptor mediated DNA synthesis: they both block it. So rather than acting as an anti-progesterone in this study, Wnstrol (as well as nandrolone , oxymetholone and trenbolone), act in the same manner as progesterone.

DO NOT USE WINSTROL AS AN ANTI-PROGESTERONE/ANTI-PROLACTIN. That is not what it does. Get yourself some Pramiprexole or Cabergoline if you want to control prolactin levels in the body. If you attempt to run Winstrol with Tren in a cycle thinking that its going to block progesterone receptors and in turn prevent prolactin secretion - you're going to be very dissapointed to find that your prolactin levels will still rise. Once again, don't do it.

[Esculptor]

this is strange Atomini.

For as he had spoken, I know some people who use winstrol for this purpose and where the tests indicate a low prolactin

[Atomini]

this is strange Atomini.

For as he had spoken, I know some people who use winstrol for this purpose and where the tests indicate a low prolactin

Everyone can react differently to different compounds. Some people do not have prolactin increases with trenbolone just as many people do not have gyno issues despite aromatizing steroids converting to estrogen (myself being one of them, at least for the time being - knock on wood). When we get into far deeper detail, we see that for prolactin levels to increase, there must be high estrogens and also high progesterone levels, which then result in prolactin being released by the anterior pituitary. While reducing estrogen to lower than normal levels does resolve the issue of prolactin increases, I don't consider such to be healthy. I have also seen reports of normal estrogen levels and lactation occurring.

The interesting thing is, that high progestersone levels actually inhibit prolactin production. With this being said, note that 19-nors such as nandrolone and trenbolone are classified as progestins. One would now think that trenbolone should actually suppress prolactin secretion. It makes logical sense considering the evidence.

So in theory, tren should NOT raise prolactin levels, however it absolutely does in most people. I can unequivocally say that tren rasies prolactin levels because I have the bloodwork to prove it, and i've seen others too. And from the successful prevention/reduction of sides many others have experienced from using prolactin-antagonists, it would seem that all of these people are not the exception. Now, when we delve into the world of AAS, we know that when modifications are made to the chemical strucutres of hormones to create different and more powerful anabolic steroids with different attributes, we end up with compounds that are supposed to act a certain way when they absolutely in real practicality show exactly the opposite! One such compound as an example is Anadrol ! Anadrol is a DHT-derivative, which makes it highly androgenic and unable to convert into estrogen - yet it produces heavy estrogenic side effects without aromatization. Other strange anomalies that have been found with other AAS is, for example, Anavar which has been found to cause gyno in a very small amount of people because it somehow has a binding affinity for the estradiol receptor!

The fact is, even if it was true that winstrol acted as a prolactin-antagonist, I would still not use it for this purpose because of the fact that I have not seen any data describing its effectiveness at doing so. And with proven and true prolactin-antagonists out there such as Pramiprexole and Cabergoline, why take this chance?

[Esculptor]

Everyone can react differently to different compounds. Some people do not have prolactin increases with trenbolone just as many people do not have gyno issues despite aromatizing steroids converting to estrogen (myself being one of them, at least for the time being - knock on wood). When we get into far deeper detail, we see that for prolactin levels to increase, there must be high estrogens and also high progesterone levels, which then result in prolactin being released by the anterior pituitary. While reducing estrogen to lower than normal levels does resolve the issue of prolactin increases, I don't consider such to be healthy. I have also seen reports of normal estrogen levels and lactation occurring.

The interesting thing is, that high progestersone levels actually inhibit prolactin production. With this being said, note that 19-nors such as nandrolone and trenbolone are classified as progestins. One would now think that trenbolone should actually suppress prolactin secretion. It makes logical sense considering the evidence.

So in theory, tren should NOT raise prolactin levels, however it absolutely does in most people. I can unequivocally say that tren rasies prolactin levels because I have the bloodwork to prove it, and i've seen others too. And from the successful prevention/reduction of sides many others have experienced from using prolactin-antagonists, it would seem that all of these people are not the exception. Now, when we delve into the world of AAS, we know that when modifications are made to the chemical strucutres of hormones to create different and more powerful anabolic steroids with different attributes, we end up with compounds that are supposed to act a certain way when they absolutely in real practicality show exactly the opposite! One such compound as an example is Anadrol ! Anadrol is a DHT-derivative, which makes it highly androgenic and unable to convert into estrogen - yet it produces heavy estrogenic side effects without aromatization. Other strange anomalies that have been found with other AAS is, for example, Anavar which has been found to cause gyno in a very small amount of people because it somehow has a binding affinity for the estradiol receptor!

The fact is, even if it was true that winstrol acted as a prolactin-antagonist, I would still not use it for this purpose because of the fact that I have not seen any data describing its effectiveness at doing so. And with proven and true prolactin-antagonists out there such as Pramiprexole and Cabergoline, why take this chance?

I understand.

The fact is that the use of Winstrol would be more viable (cheaper) and less side

I will make a cycle with tren soon and I came to use winstrol as an anti-prolactin

[Atomini]

I understand.

The fact is that the use of Winstrol would be more viable (cheaper) and less side

I will make a cycle with tren soon and I came to use winstrol as an anti-prolactin

No, that is not a fact and I beg to differ there. Cabergoline is extremely cheap, and there is no reason not to use it. Cabaser by Upjohn comes in a bottle of 20 tablets that are 1mg each, for around approximately $100 per bottle and scored so that you can cut them in half (because even 0.5mg per week is quite effective at keeping prolactin levels low). If you use 1mg per week, that's a TWENTY WEEK SUPPLY. That is FAR cheaper than using winstrol as an anti-prolactin if you look at the going price of winstrol these days. And you said less side effects? With Caber, you're getting something that is a guaranteed prolactin antagonist (as opposed to this baseless claim that winstrol is, which i've explained to you in detail that it in fact is not) that comes with no side effects at all when used at a 1mg/week dose. Lets discuss the primary undesireable side effects of winstrol:

- Suppressive of natural testosterone production, making it completely un-useable for PCT pruposes. Cabergoline can absolutely be used for PCT, and even has the capability to increase endogenous testosterone production in men.
- Liver toxic (both the oral and injectable forms)
- Joint pain (why put up with this just for its un-confirmed and baseless use as an anti-prolactin?)

By the way, don't bother telling me about what price you get your winstrol for - price discussion on UGLs are not allowed here. But I guarantee you won't get a 20 week supply of winstrol for $100 at an effective dose like you can get with Cabergoline.

[Esculptor]

perfectly.

I've been reading about the side effects that could cause cabergoline WHAT I ended up discouraging

In the case of therapeutic doses would be winstrol (20 ~ 30 mg) oral form

Again sorry for the bad english

[Atomini]

Cabergoline presents no side effects at 1mg per week. In clinical studies with Parkinsons patients it has demonstrated heart valve damage at a dose of 3mg PER DAY (that's 21mg per week). Even then, it was only described that 25% of patients received heart valve damage. At 1mg per day, it is safer than peanuts.

You want to use winstrol at a 'theraputic dose' of 20-30mg per day. How do you know if this is even an effective dose at all for the prevention of prolactin-related side effects? How do you know that the use of winstrol for this purpose may require something much higher, such as lets say 130mg per day or more to achieve this effect? And that any less is a waste? You're just shooting in the dark here, you don't know what you're doing, and you're basing this whole thing off of nothing.

Regardless... i've proven already that winstrol does not have anti-prolactin/anti-progestin effects at all, but you are extremely insistant on using winstrol for this purpose anyways... so I am not going to discuss this further. You're going to do what you want regardless of the advice or evidence provided.

[Get hench Die Trying]

Atomini what are your views on using vit b6 to control prolactin levels??

[Atomini]

Better than the concept of using Winny to do it! LOL.

I've never used it myself but I have seen solid research that supports its use for that purpose.

If you have no other options, Vitamin B6 has been shown to lower prolactin levels. Here is a list of studies you can look up that have shown vitamin B6 does lower prolactin levels:

- J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1976 Mar;42(3):603-6

Effect of pyridoxine on human hypophyseal trophic hormone release: a possible stimulation of hypothalamic dopaminergic pathway.

- Delitala G, Masala A, Alagna S, Devilla L.

"A single dose of pyridoxine (300 mg iv) produced significant rises in peak levels of immunoreactive growth hormone GH and significant decrease of plasma prolactin PRL in 8 hospitalized healthy subjects. Serum glucose, luteinizing hormone LH, follicle stimulating hormone FSH and thyrotropin TSH were not altered significantly. In addition, in 5 acromegalic patients who were studied with both L-dopa and pyridoxine, inhibition of GH secretion followed either agent in a similar pattern. These data suggest a hypothalamic dopaminergic effect of pyridoxine."

- N Engl J Med 1982 Aug 12;307(7):444-5

Pyridoxine (B6) suppresses the rise in prolactin and increases the rise in growth hormone induced by exercise.

- Moretti C, Fabbri A, Gnessi L, Bonifacio V, Fraioli F, Isidori A.

- Boll Soc Ital Biol Sper 1984 Feb 28;60(2):273-8

- Barletta C, Sellini M, Bartoli A, Bigi C, Buzzetti R, Giovannini C.

"The influence of vitamin B6 in a dosage of 300 mg X 2 in 24 hrs, on circadian rhythm of plasmatic ACTH, cortisol, prolactin and somatotropin have been studied in 10 normal women. After vitamin B6 24 hrs pattern of ACTH and cortisol is unchanged; prolactin levels are slightly lower, in a statistically unsignificant proportion the night peak of growth hormone is higher in a statistically significant proportion (p. 0.05). The effect of vitamin B6 is likely to me mediated by dopaminergic receptors at hypothalamic level as previous studies by other Authors appear to prove."

[NEVERBIGENOUGH]

Ok. So I have run tren e and a but still not sure of dose. Should I run tren e 200 400 a week. I am going o run cyp with it . Feedback

[Atomini]

Dose guidelines are in the main post and FAQ.

[NaturalJohnny]

The main concern of my tren use is insomnia and the sweating. This is why I'm running only 200mg/week. In your experience will this dose prevent side effects? Or make them minimal at least?

[Atomini]

Yes, it should keep things minimal. I've only ever run tren at no lower than 300mg per week and the trensomnia wasn't THAT bad. It was there, but easily manageable. I would imageine 200mg/week would be very manageable.

Again, everyone will react differently.

[rage223]

Atomini,

Could you take a look at this...

http://www.************.com/forum/an...er-964763.html


( board makes stars on some of the urls that I paste for some dumb reason.. Just copy and paste the link and add "elite Fitness" w/ no space (what is this? No freedom of speech?!) where the stars are.... sorry it's so inconvenient! Making me go insane that competitor forums/sites are not aloud to be spoken of lol wtf )

It talks about tren only cycles. Seems crazy to me, but they seem to be saying that it carry less sides. Then to stack tern with test. Off the bat I would assume that your estrogen would take a dive from having zero actual test in your system to convert to estrogen. How can this work correctly in your body?

[Atomini]

Atomini,

Could you take a look at this...

http://www.************.com/forum/an...er-964763.html


( board makes stars on some of the urls that I paste for some dumb reason.. Just copy and paste the link and add "elite Fitness" w/ no space (what is this? No freedom of speech?!) where the stars are.... sorry it's so inconvenient! Making me go insane that competitor forums/sites are not aloud to be spoken of lol wtf )

It talks about tren only cycles. Seems crazy to me, but they seem to be saying that it carry less sides. Then to stack tern with test. Off the bat I would assume that your estrogen would take a dive from having zero actual test in your system to convert to estrogen. How can this work correctly in your body?

They are partially correct. The sides are much worse when you run a hefty dose of testosterone with trenbolone . This is why I am completely against running a higher than TRT dose (100mg/week) of testosterone with tren . But I am ALSO against running tren on its own with no testosterone.

100mg/week test + 300mg/week tren is great, minimal sides.

400mg/week test + 300mg/week tren is much more heavy on the side effect end.

This is because when you run test at a higher than TRT dose, the body will react to the larger test levels by aromatizing more of that test into estrogen. Now you have high amounts of estrogen circulating in your system. Most of the progesterone and prolactin related side effects from trenbolone are exacerbated to a great deal by estrogen. The risk of prolactin and progesterone related gyno shoots through the roof in a high-estrogen environment. The idea is to keep this to a minimum by running a minimum of testosterone. This is why I reccomend a TRT dose (100mg/week).

I would NEVER EVER reccomend running trenbolone on its own without testosterone. That's just absurd - now you're going into the other end of extremes here. Without exogenous testosterone, the exogenous trenbolone that you are administering will totally shut down your body's own endogenous testosterone production. This means that the essential and vital bodily functions that testosterone and its metabolites govern are now being severely compromised. Now, you might ask the question "well, won't the trenbolone take over for those functions? And won't it be better since tren is so much more powerful than testosterone?". The answer is: NO!

Trenbolone may be 5x as anabolic as testosterone, but that's all it pretty much has going for it. Trenbolone is a progestin with very strong anabolic effects - it is not a proper androgen for normal bodily function. And when I say 'normal bodily function', i'm talking about far more than your libido here. The human body and endocrine system is not that simple. Testosterone is vital for proper libido function, it is a regulator of cognitive and physical energy, it regulates the population of thromboxane A2 receptors on megakaryocytes and platelets and hence platelet aggregation in humans, it is essential for proper mental and psychological function, and MANY MANY more functions and I cannot list all of them here. Just because trenbolone is 'better than' testosterone in one or two areas (anabolic tissue increases), does not mean that it is better than it in every single aspect and function. Trenbolone does jack shit in many of those physiological functions that testosterone governs.

This is why you require at least a normal physological level of testosterone in your body during ANY cycle of ANYTHING. If you do this, you minimize/eliminate aromatization which is the cause for making a few tren side effects far worse. The idea here is proper balance and proper levels, NOT complete elimination of it!

I do not understand why, in this little AAS-using world, people need to go to extremes at either end with these things. Listen to what Buddha said, and find the middle way, god damnit!

[rage223]

I'm so happy i found this board!

Thanks a lot for your help!

[DRdee]

I am so glad I read this. This is a lot of information that I found great as I am adding Tren to my next cycle starting next week. I have been under the impression that I need to run a lot of Test. Currently I run 700mg of a test blend, after reading this I see I'm probably wasting money. When adding tren into the mix that is where I am going to get my results. Thanks for clearing that up.

[NaturalJohnny]

How long should a tren cycle last? I usually see people recommend 8 to 10 weeks at which point side effects become intolerable. If I'm running only 200mg per week and the sides are not a problem is there a benefit to going beyond 10 weeks?

[Atomini]

How long should a tren cycle last? I usually see people recommend 8 to 10 weeks at which point side effects become intolerable. If I'm running only 200mg per week and the sides are not a problem is there a benefit to going beyond 10 weeks?

Generally with ALL anabolic steroids , hitting beyond 10 weeks is negligible in terms of gains. 8 weeks seems to be, for most people (myself included), the sweet spot for total cumulative gains. Once you progress further and further beyond 8 weeks, the gains:risks ratio begins to decrease greatly. It also begins to become a waste of money in terms of what you spent on your gear, and the now diminishing returns you begin to see as time goes on past the 8 week point. What I used to do was run my cycles for 8-10 weeks. What would determine whether I stop at 8 weeks or keep going until 10 and cap it at 10 is if i'm still making great gains by week 8. If I found myself getting diminishing gains by week 8, i'd cut it there and not let it get to 10 weeks. These days I just cap it at 8 regardless.

Then there is also the issue of: the long you are on, the harder it is on your HPTA being shut down, and therefore the longer it will take for your body to recover. The longer the cycle is, the more difficult recovery will be. Why not keep the cycles short, recover fast, and be back on-cycle faster? Though, this isn't an excuse to keep off-time between cycles stupidly short, it is definitely okay to have a 3 or so month off-time between cycles as opposed to a 4, 5, or 6 month off-time due to the massively long cycles run.

With tren , its obvious why things should remain short in the first place. Some people who can tolerate tren better than others may be able to run it for longer. Most people just can't deal with the disturbed sleep for longer than 8 weeks. Tossing and turning in bed almost every night glancing at the clock each time to see only an hour or 2 has passed since you last opened your eyes becomes a huge nuisance and discomfort. I've resorted recently to trying sleeping meds while on tren, but the best thing is to limit cycle length if sides are bugging you THAT much.

[NaturalJohnny]

Okay thanks. I'll shoot for 8 weeks and see how I'm doing then. Since I'm on TRT recovery isn't an issue for me and if the sides are tolerable and I'm still making gains I will run it 10 weeks.

I'm curious about your past experiences with tren . What sort of gains did you achieve on your various tren cycles over the years? And how is your current high-dose cycle going?

[Atomini]

My gains on my tren cycles over the years were all brilliant. Lots of LEAN mass, no/minimal water retention, and strength gains were always MASSIVE. A lot of people say that anadrol provides the most dramatic and excellent strength gains. Well, I tried anadrol once and it didn't hold a candle to what trenbolone made me capable of lifting.

My current cycle is going well, i'm in the middle of week 2, so its still early to be expecting strength gains and physique changes. But all of the telltale tren signs are there. I'm posting about it here http://forums.steroid.com/showthread...-Gen-Sys)-labs. under the lab product i'm using.

[NaturalJohnny]

I'm happy to hear your had such great results running tren this way. You've inspired me to use in a similar manner. I'm in the second week of my tren e cycle and this is my first cycle ever. I know tren on a first cycle is frowned upon but with your knowledge and all the preparation I'm doing I feel confident I can get good results with minimal sides. Either way I want to see how I handle this amazing compound. Sometimes I wonder why people bother with anything else when tren seems to do everything better.

By the way, I've begun to pass on this way of thinking about tren to another steroid forum I sometimes frequent. Hopefully it helps others understand what is possible with it.

[Esculptor]

atomini, Masteron except where other anabol do you think good to be used along with tren ?

[Atomini]

Masteron is an excellent addition to tren , hence why I mentioned the only exception I have about all other anabolic steroids being not worth it is for Masteron. Though, I don't consider it NECESSARY to run with tren, it is an excellent addition due to its high androgenicity, which only amplifies the rock hard dry look that you end up getting with tren. Masteron can amplify this even more because it acts as a mild aromatase inhibitor, which will cause some water weight to be dropped, resulting in an even harder look. It also has the ability to lower SHBG. Overall, Masteron is a great supportive compound to any cycle, but it really shines with trenbolone .

[thelib]

So even if using enathate version you would stop the cycle at 8-10 weeks? I was planning a 14 weeker of test e 300mg and 400mg tren e. so if it's going to be a short cycle I would run an alternate cycle of 300mg test and 600mg tren e a week. I handle tren well. What do you think?

[Atomini]

So even if using enathate version you would stop the cycle at 8-10 weeks? I was planning a 14 weeker of test e 300mg and 400mg tren e. so if it's going to be a short cycle I would run an alternate cycle of 300mg test and 600mg tren e a week. I handle tren well. What do you think?

No. With Enanthate , you must run it for at LEAST 10 weeks. 10 weeks would be the least. 12 weeks is optimal. This is due to the longer ester resulting in a longer time required to achieve optimal blood plasma level peak, of course.

[thelib]

No. With Enanthate, you must run it for at LEAST 10 weeks. 10 weeks would be the least. 12 weeks is optimal. This is due to the longer ester resulting in a longer time required to achieve optimal blood plasma level peak, of course.

So no to a 14 weeker? After 12 weeks does it get to same point as running ace for 8-10 weeks? And how does 600mg compare to 400mg, is there really much benefit compared to sides?

[Atomini]

14 weeks isn't extremely long for a long-estered compound, but it is still on the longer end of things. As far as 600mg vs 400mg of tren ... you won't know until you go. But yes, it can be significant in terms of sides for some people, and everyone reacts differently as well.

The most tren i've ever used in the past was 300-400mg/week. I am now on 800mg and ending the 2nd week. Thus far I have not seen anything I haven't seen before, save for some insomnia that is a bit worse than usual, but I will only know as I get deeper into my cycle and it kicks in even more.

[NaturalJohnny]

I'm confused about the difference between long and short chain ester cycle lengths.

I understand that short esters "kick in" and "kick out" faster than long esters. But if this is so, why would you take a long ester longer than a short? Shouldn't you start and stop at the same time considering the long ester will still be in your system well after you've stopped taking it and providing gains.

[Atomini]

I'm confused about the difference between long and short chain ester cycle lengths.

I understand that short esters "kick in" and "kick out" faster than long esters. But if this is so, why would you take a long ester longer than a short? Shouldn't you start and stop at the same time considering the long ester will still be in your system well after you've stopped taking it and providing gains.

This is exactly what I wonder! LOL!

I used long esters once, and that was my very first cycle ever. I used short esters after that and never looked back. The benefit of long esters is mostly convenience for people who don't want to be pinning themselves every other day. 2 shots a week is all it takes for a long ester. Because they take longer to kick in (approx 4-5 weeks) vs short esters (approx 2-3 weeks), the cycle must be run longer. Cycle termination for long esters must also be done well in advance. A short estered cycle can be terminated and 4-6 days later PCT can begin. With long esters like enanthate , you require TWO WEEKS at least before you begin PCT. Long esters are slow to build optimal blood levels, and they are slow to clear.

[NaturalJohnny]

But then wouldn't the long ester steroid continue to be in your system for weeks after you've stopped taken it? You would still be getting the benefits of it, right?

If we think about it in a mg per cycle way:

100mg test prop every day for 10 weeks is 7000 total mg of test.
700mg test cyp every week for 10 weeks is also 7000 total mgs.

Wouldnt the total mgs of your cycle be more relevant than the ester? Why run cyp longer? You'd be taking in an additional 1400mg.

[Atomini]

But then wouldn't the long ester steroid continue to be in your system for weeks after you've stopped taken it? You would still be getting the benefits of it, right?

If we think about it in a mg per cycle way:

100mg test prop every day for 10 weeks is 7000 total mg of test.
700mg test cyp every week for 10 weeks is also 7000 total mgs.

Wouldnt the total mgs of your cycle be more relevant than the ester? Why run cyp longer? You'd be taking in an additional 1400mg.

No its not, it doesn't work that way. Here, i've copied and pasted this from a thread about half lives and frontloading from the educational threads section. The following is all based on a 7-day half life ester:

Regular way of taking AAS and its natural buildup progression (with 250mg being the level we want to achieve):
Day 1 – 250mg
Day 7 – 125mg + 250mg = 375mg
Day 14 – 187.5 + 250mg = 437.5mg
Day 21 – 219.2 + 250mg = 469.2mg
Day 28 - 234.6 + 250mg = 484.6mg
Day 35 – 242.3 + 250mg = 492.3mg
Day 42 – 246.1 + 250mg = 496.1mg

Do you see how slow optimal blood levels (250mg) take to achieve with long esters? This is why I reccomend that if one is to use long esters for a shorter period of time, that they frontload (and even then, it still 'kicks in' a while longer than short esters). In practice, the reason why you should run cyp longer is because its effects are not felt (the strength gains, the physique changes, etc.) until 4-5 weeks in, and by the time that happens, if you cap your cycle at 10 weeks, you have 5 weeks left of high optimal blood levels giving you gains - that's very short! This is not so with shorter esters where the 'kick in' period is typically seen at weeks 2-3, and if you cap your cycle at 10 weeks with a short ester, you have 7 weeks of optimal blood levels and growth.

With that being said, it is much safer and far more optimal to keep your cycles short in the first place any ways, and short estered steroids through their nature make this possible. You cannot possibly stop a cycle of Test Cypionate at 8 weeks with optimal results, because you are essentially stopping it right when you are in the middle of your optimal gaining period. Not so with short esters. The other idea behind shorter cycles is the issue of diminishing gains after a certain point, which i've discussed a few posts back.

[JJ14]

with tren acetate, how long after injection till you see good levels? It only lasts a day or two as i understand it

[Atomini]

Initially, blood levels peak nearly immediately. What you need to look at is the big picture - the overall blood plasma levels rising to the level you want it to. Usually by week 2-3 do levels reach steady optimal levels.

For example, lets say you want to do 400mg/week of tren ace, and you are injecting 100mg EOD. The half life of acetate is about 2 days. This means when you inject 100mg, 48 hours afterwards you will be left with 50mg in your system. So,

Day 1: 100mg
Day 2: 50mg + 100mg = 150mg
Day 4: 75mg + 100mg = 175mg
Day 6: 87.5mg + 100mg = 187.5mg
Day 8: 93.75mg + 100mg = 193.75mg

And so on, and so forth, until you get to about the 21 day mark (which is the 3 week mark), and see what blood levels get to at that point. See how blood levels need to eventually 'get up there' in the body to a steady level? And how much quicker it happens with a shorter ester than a longer one?

[JJ14]

Im new, running 400mg test cyp and 50mg tren m,w,f, sun is my rest day, dont want to get crazy, and i have arimidex and nolva on hand, thanks to this thread ill procure something to counter the tren downsides too, am i wasting it at only 150mg a week? i know i should have stuck to test only first time but it is what it is....for the record maybe because of the test and alot of B vitamins i take anyways, i am having no sexual side effects, acne, i notice a slightly reduced cardio at jiu-jitsu but nothing major. other than in bed no incresed aggression haha