Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 47
Like Tree14Likes

Thread: Is the young & steroids overstated on this forum

  1. #1
    toilet is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    201

    Is the young & steroids overstated on this forum

    So basically I am 22 going on 23 and am hungry to learn. I have read all the stickies and have a few questions.

    Firstly, having read all of the threads in the 'steroids gone wrong for the young' sticky I could only find one whereby the guy did a proper PCT and came out with problems. In all of the other threads no PCT was done or it was completely half arsed. This led me to conclude that the reason these guys suffered tremendous sides were BECAUSE they failed to implement a proper PCT (and also happened to take some crazy cycles for their first cycles often not even cycling off them) not because of their age. Sure they were young but when trying to ascertain 'cycles going wrong for the young' surely you would put age as the only variable in the equation. It seems these guys cycled recklessly and THIS is why they suffered sides. Its a given that anyone who doesnt do a PCT is going to end up with their endocrine system screwed up so I didnt find any of this too convincing.

    The second basis and most convincing one I read about in the stickies was that your endocrine system may not be fully developed. After research it seems it has generally developed by 21 but can develop as late as 25. As such, many err on the side of caution and refuse to give advice to the young just incase they havent yet fully developed. Cant i just see an endocrinologist and see if mine is fully developed before gear?

    Thirdly, people often seem to be saying that the young should utilise their high test levels and apparently can build muscle without gear. I did some research and the average test of a 25 yr old is 700 ng/dl wheras by 45 its only 600 ng/dl average (is a well known 1996 study on this that you can find with a quick google search) + on cycle its anywhere from 2000-4000? So basically the difference between a middle aged man and a young man is minimal. So it seems to be that the muscle building properties of youth are overstated or am i missing something?

    The other information I read about having solid training/nutrition under your belt doesnt apply to me so leaving that out (trained 5+ years and have solid knowledge of nutrition).

    Sorry if I am coming across as arrogant or unwilling to learn; I just fail to understand the reasons against the young cycling and feel they are being overstated; so basically asking as candidly as possible - are you guys overstating them?
    Last edited by toilet; 06-19-2013 at 05:12 AM.

  2. #2
    austinite's Avatar
    austinite is offline HRT Specialist ~ AR-Platinum Elite-Hall of Famer ~
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Cialis, Texas
    Posts
    31,154
    Hey toilet,

    1. This is a very high trafficked forum and the stories you read are a drop in the bucket.
    2. PCT betters your chances, not guarantees your chances.
    3. Endocrine system is of high concern. You could also halt your growth.
    4. No such thing as fully developed at 21. Possible? Sure, but not likely.
    5. Heavy, multi compound cycles are irrelevant. Shutdown is shutdown.

    I don't know where you've been researching, but I promise you, a 600 ng/dl result in a 45 year old is very rare. 1996 is 17 years ago. There's been plenty of development and new information since then.

    2000 ng/dl is not cycle serum levels. That would indicate underdosed gear. Even 4000 ng/dl would be weak at the end of the average 12 week cycle. So I'm not sure where you're getting your info.

    Most, if not all 21 year olds are still developing. You'd have to have X-Rays done to confirm full development. And that only refers to your structure, not your endocrine system.

    The issues mainly stem from the reason an 18 to early 20's man would want to cycle:

    1. I can't make anymore gains. I have plateaued.
    --- This is almost always a diet related issue. Sure.. you can cycle. However, it won't help you. You need to learn how to eat. Because with or without steroids , you will not gain an ounce if your diet remain as it is. Everyone on earth says they have a great diet. I can assure you that is far from the truth. So why run before you can walk? Learn to eat, train and sleep, then consider AAS. Regardless of your age. I would give the same advice to a 45 year old.

    2. I want to look like that model, I want to get all the girls.
    -- Right. Good reason. Nothing like having a motivating figure. This one has everything to do with age. They're so impatient and desperate that they can't wait a couple of years? Really?? It takes at least a few years just to get your workouts dialed. It took me years just to figure out everything I was doing wrong. So why? Why rush things... you have way more years to come than you've already lived.

    3. Everyone else is doing it.
    -- Forget about it. This one is obvious. All those folks around you that are your age or younger, are not out of the woods yet. Soon they will deflate and most likely, be miserable because they have to become Testosterone Therapy patients at the age of 27. Like me.

    So you see, there's more that comes along with being young than physical problems, it's mental. Young folks (and this includes me in my younger days) want instant gratification. I want it, and I want it now. It's so easy, pop a few pills and bam, I'm huge. That's not how it works.

    Back to nutrition... I can assure you, nutrition is the one most important aspect of any cycle. People assume you can grow on an average diet. It doesn't work like that, and this is why the majority fail. This is why we are impressed with the guys that get on stage at 4% BF. It's a task, with or without gear.

    Another crucial thing that every young person seems to love to ignore is blood work. This one really drives me nuts. If folks want to look good on the outside, why not respect their bodies and make sure the insides are healthy. I can't even begin to tell you how many times folks complain of extreme fatigue, lethargy and a host of other problems. These are the guys who think they're invincible and never bothered to check their blood work. Well, AAS will wreak havoc on your levels. It all get's out of whack and they don't understand how to control it. Estrogen, lipids, thyroid, prolactin, liver enzymes, you name it. Everyone reads that you need an AI and PCT and all will be great. Not even remotely close. You'll end up doing far more damage than good, and your blood will turn into cement eventually.

    So that's the idea. We can overcome objections ad justify cycling at a young age all day long. At the end of the day, we all agree that it takes several years for someone to learn how to train and sleep, and another year or two to learn how to eat properly. That's not a very long time, but it's just enough time to get you into a 'safe zone' for cycling. You do this, and you'll enter the AAS world much more informed, empowered and successful. No question about it.

    You can do it, or you can do it right.

    "It's human nature in a "more is better" society full of a younger generation that expects instant gratification, then complain when they don't get it. The problem will get far worse before it gets better." - kelkel
    ~ PLEASE DO NOT ASK FOR SOURCE CHECKS ~

    "It's human nature in a 'more is better' society full of a younger generation that expects instant gratification, then complain when they don't get it. The problem will get far worse before it gets better". ~ kelkel

  3. #3
    swm1972 is offline Knowledgeable Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    807
    Quote Originally Posted by austinite

    2000 ng/dl is not cycle serum levels. That would indicate underdosed gear. Even 4000 ng/dl would be weak at the end of the average 12 week cycle. So I'm not sure where you're getting your info.
    Hmmm, honestly I think his numbers are petty close to being right on. I'm on hrt @ 200mgs/week and that puts me into the 1200-1300ng/dl range. I see people all the time referring to a 400-500mg cycle. That would put you into the mid to upper 2000 range.

  4. #4
    austinite's Avatar
    austinite is offline HRT Specialist ~ AR-Platinum Elite-Hall of Famer ~
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Cialis, Texas
    Posts
    31,154
    Quote Originally Posted by swm1972 View Post
    Hmmm, honestly I think his numbers are petty close to being right on. I'm on hrt @ 200mgs/week and that puts me into the 1200-1300ng/dl range. I see people all the time referring to a 400-500mg cycle. That would put you into the mid to upper 2000 range.
    600mg of test E would yield around 3500-4000 in week 8. That's with Pfizer.
    ~ PLEASE DO NOT ASK FOR SOURCE CHECKS ~

    "It's human nature in a 'more is better' society full of a younger generation that expects instant gratification, then complain when they don't get it. The problem will get far worse before it gets better". ~ kelkel

  5. #5
    toilet is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    201
    Thank you for the well thought out response. Much appreciated. Most of these reasons seem right on point.

    1. Link to 1996 study: "Simon, D., Nahoul, K., & Charles M.A. (1996). Sex Hormones, Aging, Ethnicity and Insulin Sensivity in Men: An Overview of the TELECOM Study. In Vermeulen, A. & Oddens, and B. J. (Eds.), Androgens and the Aging Male (pp. 85-102). New York: Parthenon Publishing." - cant post hyerplinks but that info should help you find it - you guys can probably make more of these numbers and tell me if there hav ebeen new studies since then
    2. As to where I got my info of test levels on cycle; been reading these threads and some guy got his bloodwork done mid cycle (think it was tren + sust and a few others) and it was 3500 ng/dl and on another thread I read someone was given fake gear and was 550 ng/dl mid cycle for test-e and some members commented saying he should be around 1500-2000. Not very scientific I guess but I am new to this so just gleaning all info I can.


    Personally, my progress has been stalled for at least a year and I think I may be at my natural limit. I have a very small bone structure and Im an ectomorph and can't seem to get very big at all. Current stats: 5'9, 154 lbs 8.5% BF. Recently cut from 167 12% BF. Cutting with a weekly refeed and make sure I keep all my lifts the same. Track my macros and micros. My lifts are very good; bench press 225lb x 10. Squat 280 x 10, Dead lift 340 x 10. Don't know what to do... feel like ive tried everything. I have come across some research that claimed to calculate your natural limit based on data from all natural pros in history and did so based on your bone structure measurements (based on my bonestructure I was pretty near my limit - pathetic when your natural limit is 15 inch arms at 10% BF according to the data). And I accept that it may seem laughable to think I've reached my limit at 154 8% but honestly if I try cut anymore my bf% won't go down, even carb cycling, I just waste away. And when I bulk I never get past 175 15% even on over 4000 cals a day
    Last edited by toilet; 06-19-2013 at 06:14 AM.

  6. #6
    austinite's Avatar
    austinite is offline HRT Specialist ~ AR-Platinum Elite-Hall of Famer ~
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Cialis, Texas
    Posts
    31,154
    Quote Originally Posted by toilet View Post
    Thank you for the well thought out response. Much appreciated. Most of these reasons seem right on point.

    1. Link to 1996 study: "Simon, D., Nahoul, K., & Charles M.A. (1996). Sex Hormones, Aging, Ethnicity and Insulin Sensivity in Men: An Overview of the TELECOM Study. In Vermeulen, A. & Oddens, and B. J. (Eds.), Androgens and the Aging Male (pp. 85-102). New York: Parthenon Publishing." - cant post hyerplinks but that info should help you find it - you guys can probably make more of these numbers and tell me if there hav ebeen new studies since then
    2. As to where I got my info of test levels on cycle; been reading these threads and some guy got his bloodwork done mid cycle (think it was tren + sust and a few others) and it was 3500 ng/dl and on another thread I read someone was given fake gear and was 550 ng/dl mid cycle for test-e and some members commented saying he should be around 1500-2000. Not very scientific I guess but I am new to this so just gleaning all info I can.


    Personally, my progress has been stalled for at least a year and I think I may be at my natural limit. I have a very small bone structure and Im an ectomorph and can't seem to get very big at all. Current stats: 5'9, 154 lbs 8.5% BF. Recently cut from 167 12% BF. Cutting with a weekly refeed and make sure I keep all my lifts the same. Track my macros and micros. My lifts are very good; bench press 225lb x 10. Squat 280 x 10, Dead lift 340 x 10. Don't know what to do... feel like ive tried everything. I have come across some research that claimed to calculate your natural limit based on data from all natural pros in history and did so based on your bone structure measurements (based on my bonestructure I was pretty near my limit - pathetic when your natural limit is 15 inch arms at 10% BF according to the data).

    1.
    That's a TRT study done on older subjects, not sure why you referred to it but here is the stated conclusion, which you should be more concerned with rather than test levels:

    Conclusion:
    Several studies suggest that aging men with low serum testosterone levels could benefit from testosterone replacement therapy for bone, muscle, and psychosexual functions. However, in short-term follow-up, significant adverse effects can be observed, and for long-term follow-up, larger clinical studies are needed before a risk-benefit profile for testosterone therapy in hypogonadal aging men can be assessed.
    Regardless, that study is not relevant to anything we're talking about. You can't compare your levels to that of a 70 year old. Too many variables including body response to therapy.

    2. You'd have to show me these threads you're talking about. I need details on these cycles. If someone cycled and ended up with 2000 ng/dl, they failed. Miserably. One of the cons of UGL's. You're also repeating the same objections I overcame earlier, let's not play cat and mouse all day.

    Personally, my progress has been stalled for at least a year and I think I may be at my natural limit.
    Refer to my points on diet. In order for us to determine that your diet is not lacking, we would need to have it critiqued and evaluated by one of our experienced professionals in the nutrition section. I emphasize 'experienced'.

    Current stats: 5'9, 154 lbs 8.5% BF.
    154 lbs on cycle is a surefire way to seek injury. Your body at that structure will not handle the strength gains. More than likely, you will cause some sort of damage. Be it minor or major, it will affect your progress, rendering your cycle wasteful. A good diet will help you gain more naturally so that you can have a good base to build off of. So you see, we have more objections here and it's not age related. No one with your stats is unable to gain more naturally, no one. You'd have to have a serious medical condition, which is fairly rare.

    Don't know what to do... feel like ive tried everything.
    You havent tried to have your diet evaluated. Look for members in the nutrition section such as gbrice75, 405 and Back in Black.

    I have come across some research that claimed to calculate your natural limit based on data from all natural pros in history and did so based on your bone structure measurements (based on my bonestructure I was pretty near my limit - pathetic when your natural limit is 15 inch arms at 10% BF according to the data).
    No such thing. Sounds like some magic trick. You need X-Rays to look for either an epiphyseal plate or line. No other way to determine so.
    ma_fighter, marcus300 and Java Man like this.
    ~ PLEASE DO NOT ASK FOR SOURCE CHECKS ~

    "It's human nature in a 'more is better' society full of a younger generation that expects instant gratification, then complain when they don't get it. The problem will get far worse before it gets better". ~ kelkel

  7. #7
    Lunk1's Avatar
    Lunk1 is offline aka "JOB"
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    METHAMERICA
    Posts
    16,392
    Amazing posts A. Great read.

    Also keep in mind Toilet (nice name lol) that the most you can expect to gain is 6-8 pounds of muscle on average. If your diet and training are off you wont even keep those gains. Is a few pounds of muscle worth risking your development?

  8. #8
    Flacco's Avatar
    Flacco is online now Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Phuket Thailand/Brooklyn
    Posts
    864
    From my own experience... and watching other young guys start juicing at an early age... Most people I know who start juicing young... keep juicing and become dependant on it to stay in or even go to the gym. I'll speak for myself. I started at 18, and haven't set foot in a gym without aas since. Well, maybe a couple weeks before cycles, but my point is... it becomes very easy/addicting to rely on the aas themselves for gains rather than diet/training/sleep/discipline ect. Everyone says... "I'll just do one cycle to get where I want to be, and maintain that." No one thinks... "This will lead to TRT by the time I'm 30" I'm 28. I probably should be on TRT now, but I haven't seen a doctor. I'm a good example of what not to do. I'll share this so that maybe I can help someone in your/my same situation. I started blasting and cruising last year. A wise person learns from other's mistakes. I'm the type that has to touch fire to learn to not get burned. My advice... (and I wish I woulda taken other people's when they told me) wait until your body actually needs it. You've got a better chance at having a happier/more fullfiling life by not starting AAS too soon. Its not just your endocrine system that you can fck up. Steroids can cause depression/psychological issues also. I'm sure I sound like a hypocrite saying "wait," but If I had known better, I would have taken my own advice.
    Java Man likes this.

  9. #9
    Docd187123 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    2,220
    Quote Originally Posted by Flacco View Post
    From my own experience... and watching other young guys start juicing at an early age... Most people I know who start juicing young... keep juicing and become dependant on it to stay in or even go to the gym. I'll speak for myself. I started at 18, and haven't set foot in a gym without aas since. Well, maybe a couple weeks before cycles, but my point is... it becomes very easy/addicting to rely on the aas themselves for gains rather than diet/training/sleep/discipline ect. Everyone says... "I'll just do one cycle to get where I want to be, and maintain that." No one thinks... "This will lead to TRT by the time I'm 30" I'm 28. I probably should be on TRT now, but I haven't seen a doctor. I'm a good example of what not to do. I'll share this so that maybe I can help someone in your/my same situation. I started blasting and cruising last year. A wise person learns from other's mistakes. I'm the type that has to touch fire to learn to not get burned. My advice... (and I wish I woulda taken other people's when they told me) wait until your body actually needs it. You've got a better chance at having a happier/more fullfiling life by not starting AAS too soon. Its not just your endocrine system that you can fck up. Steroids can cause depression/psychological issues also. I'm sure I sound like a hypocrite saying "wait," but If I had known better, I would have taken my own advice.

    You don't sound like a hypocrite at all. You sound like someone who has to learn from their own mistakes to realize things. I happen to be the same way. At least you've learned something along the way and put your experiences out there for others to learn from. I'd say that's very respectable.

  10. #10
    austinite's Avatar
    austinite is offline HRT Specialist ~ AR-Platinum Elite-Hall of Famer ~
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Cialis, Texas
    Posts
    31,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Flacco View Post
    From my own experience... and watching other young guys start juicing at an early age... Most people I know who start juicing young... keep juicing and become dependant on it to stay in or even go to the gym. I'll speak for myself. I started at 18, and haven't set foot in a gym without aas since. Well, maybe a couple weeks before cycles, but my point is... it becomes very easy/addicting to rely on the aas themselves for gains rather than diet/training/sleep/discipline ect. Everyone says... "I'll just do one cycle to get where I want to be, and maintain that." No one thinks... "This will lead to TRT by the time I'm 30" I'm 28. I probably should be on TRT now, but I haven't seen a doctor. I'm a good example of what not to do. I'll share this so that maybe I can help someone in your/my same situation. I started blasting and cruising last year. A wise person learns from other's mistakes. I'm the type that has to touch fire to learn to not get burned. My advice... (and I wish I woulda taken other people's when they told me) wait until your body actually needs it. You've got a better chance at having a happier/more fullfiling life by not starting AAS too soon. Its not just your endocrine system that you can fck up. Steroids can cause depression/psychological issues also. I'm sure I sound like a hypocrite saying "wait," but If I had known better, I would have taken my own advice.
    In a way many of are that way. But I wouldn't say hypocrites unless you're currently not following what you preach.
    ~ PLEASE DO NOT ASK FOR SOURCE CHECKS ~

    "It's human nature in a 'more is better' society full of a younger generation that expects instant gratification, then complain when they don't get it. The problem will get far worse before it gets better". ~ kelkel

  11. #11
    Flacco's Avatar
    Flacco is online now Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Phuket Thailand/Brooklyn
    Posts
    864
    Quote Originally Posted by austinite View Post
    In a way many of are that way. But I wouldn't say hypocrites unless you're currently not following what you preach.
    I know... I can just imagine what SOME of us must look like to the young men/women that come one here. Giving them advice not to (or at least be as smart/safe as possible about it), while doing the opposite. I'm not always the most cautious/safest person (usually the opposite), but I'm paying for my mistakes. You wanna play?... be prepared to pay. I wish I had come on here 10 years ago, and maybe been talked out of doing a cycle. Its so hard when you see all your friends blowing up without any immediate negative effects.

  12. #12
    toilet is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    201
    Regardless, that study is not relevant to anything we're talking about. You can't compare your levels to that of a 70 year old. Too many variables including body response to therapy.
    I completely agree with you I would never compare my test levels to those of a 70 yr old that is just silly. Although the study reaches conclusions about TRT for older men it uses 'aging' as a relative term and includes data on young males too to draw a comparison. Based on 125 test subjects the average test level of a male under 25 was 692 ng/dl. Based on 148 test subjects the average test level of a male 40-44 was 597 ng/dl. The only way this data, to me, could be incorrect would be if the medical method used to reach these numbers was incorrect (unlikely) or the male populace drastically changed in 17 years (unlikely from an evolutionary standpoint). So yeah sorry if I didn't make my point clear earlier; to me this study is merely illustrative of the fact that the difference between test levels of youth and middle aged men is overstated. 'Newbie gains' will be made my any new trainer regardless of age in their first 6 months or so but after that point it is basically just as hard for us young guys to make gains is the overall point I am making...because it seems that many people forget that when they say 'utilize your high test levels'. My purpose of citing the study wasn't to compare my test levels to that of 70 year olds.

    Refer to my points on diet. In order for us to determine that your diet is not lacking, we would need to have it critiqued and evaluated by one of our experienced professionals in the nutrition section. I emphasize 'experienced'.
    I will put my diet up when I get a spare moment. Thanks but having read many nutrition books I am 99% sure it is spot on (not trying to sound arrogant at all).

    154 lbs on cycle is a surefire way to seek injury. Your body at that structure will not handle the strength gains. More than likely, you will cause some sort of damage. Be it minor or major, it will affect your progress, rendering your cycle wasteful. A good diet will help you gain more naturally so that you can have a good base to build off of. So you see, we have more objections here and it's not age related. No one with your stats is unable to gain more naturally, no one. You'd have to have a serious medical condition, which is fairly rare.
    I am not trying to be argumentative but would just like clarification on one point... it was my understanding that the post in the sticky about structure/tendon development was based on the notion that your structure develops through lifting heavier weights rather than the weight of the individual themselves; i.e through years of heavy lifting and compound exercises your tendons etc strengthen meaning that it is imperative to have good lifts rather than actually weigh a lot. Your post identifies that I would not be able to handle the strength gains (rather than weight gains)... my lifts are already near their natural limit (see above - e.g 225 bench x 10) so in that regard shouldn't I be fine? Weight gain shouldn't be a problem because people often gain 30lbs on cycle (albeit including water weight). So I thought I would be in a better position than say the average lifter who benches 180 but weighs more than me and gets on the juice?

    If starting a cycle on a low weight is unhealthy do you then advise me to gain weight first. I have a twin brother and he currently weighs 178 at 17%bf and Im 154 at 8%. I used to be around his weight but have been cutting the last 3-4 months because I thought you got the most gains if you start a cycle as lean as possible? Im really confused now :/ I can quite easily utilise my firing metabolism and 'carb up' for a month and start at maybe 165 11%?

    l speak for myself. I started at 18, and haven't set foot in a gym without aas since. Well, maybe a couple weeks before cycles, but my point is... it becomes very easy/addicting to rely on the aas themselves for gains rather than diet/training/sleep/discipline ect. Everyone says... "I'll just do one cycle to get where I want to be, and maintain that." No one thinks... "This will lead to TRT by the time I'm 30" I'm 28. I probably should be on TRT now, but I haven't seen a doctor. I'm a good example of what not to do.
    Thanks for your post Flacco. How did you end up needing TRT so early? Is it because you flouted your PCT's or have blasted and cruised in the past as well? Like I was operating on the understanding that if you cycled something 'safe' like test-prop or test-e and did a proper PCT 99% of the time you will have no repercussions at all? and that test only shuts down permanently if you PCT incorrectly or take lengthy cycles blastin and cruisin. And that all the liver damage etc can be alleviated if you stay away from harmful orals? Like did you guys all stuff up somewhere to end up needing TRT so young? I just thought Id get my bloodwork done to ascertain my natty test level (+ all the other relevant data; liver, total/free test and whatever else the sticky said) then cycle test prop for say 10 weeks do the generic 5 week nolva/clomid PCT then wait a month and get bloodwork done to see it all fine and dandy then live the rest of my life happily ever after 10kgs heavier with no sides...

    Am i dreaming?
    Last edited by toilet; 06-19-2013 at 05:43 PM.

  13. #13
    toilet is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    201
    Quote Originally Posted by Flacco View Post
    I know... I can just imagine what SOME of us must look like to the young men/women that come one here. Giving them advice not to (or at least be as smart/safe as possible about it), while doing the opposite. I'm not always the most cautious/safest person (usually the opposite), but I'm paying for my mistakes. You wanna play?... be prepared to pay. I wish I had come on here 10 years ago, and maybe been talked out of doing a cycle. Its so hard when you see all your friends blowing up without any immediate negative effects.
    Well of course it can look hypocritical but I don't take it that way. You guys have a tonne of experience and mean well If you are willing to pay the price of TRT for life then I guess no problem cycling indefinitely. But I know I'm not willing to pay that price. Just want one cycle done as safely as possible with no sides. So would like to draw on the wealth of experience and see how this can be done.

  14. #14
    Times Roman's Avatar
    Times Roman is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Back from Afghanistan
    Posts
    27,383
    are they overstated?

    ...I don't know, what do you think?

    Why would we go through all the hassle and tell people your age they are not ready yet? It certainly starts a shit load of arguments, and consumes a lot of time on my part. I don't get paid here, so It's not something the owner is telling us to do.

    So you tell me. What do you think? And why do you think I spend all the time and energy doing it?

    Waiting for your response.............

    ---Roman

  15. #15
    toilet is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    201
    Thanks for your reply Roman.

    I sure you appreciate what it is like to be young and always wanting a reason WHY. I know I may come across as argumentative but that is not my intention. Like every young person I just want clearly explained reasons rather than just being told no. So of course I read the stickies and then try and argue against the points raised in them.

    Hypothetically; If you are under 25 BUT; 1. have been training 5+ years 2. Have solid nutrition 3. Have checked with an endocrinologist to ensure your development is in check 4. Have had blood work done pre/post cycle 5. Follow a test only cycle with proper PCT - are you at as good a chance as any for nothing to go wrong?

    FYI im 23 in 3 months.

  16. #16
    austinite's Avatar
    austinite is offline HRT Specialist ~ AR-Platinum Elite-Hall of Famer ~
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Cialis, Texas
    Posts
    31,154
    I completely agree with you I would never compare my test levels to those of a 70 yr old that is just silly. Although the study reaches conclusions about TRT for older men it uses 'aging' as a relative term and includes data on young males too to draw a comparison. Based on 125 test subjects the average test level of a male under 25 was 692 ng/dl. Based on 148 test subjects the average test level of a male 40-44 was 597 ng/dl. The only way this data, to me, could be incorrect would be if the medical method used to reach these numbers was incorrect (unlikely) or the male populace drastically changed in 17 years (unlikely from an evolutionary standpoint). So yeah sorry if I didn't make my point clear earlier; to me this study is merely illustrative of the fact that the test levels of youth and middle aged men is overstated. 'Newbie gains' will be made my any new trainer regardless of age in their first 6 months or so but after that point it is basically just as hard for us young guys to make gains is the overall point I am making...because it seems that many people forget that when they say 'utilize your high test levels'. My purpose of citing the study wasn't to compare my test levels to that of 70 year olds.

    What is your point with test levels? What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? No, you will not have 1500 ng/dl as a teen or in your 20's. I don't really care what others are telling you... I'm telling you that if you're in a decent range, leave it there. It is not relevant whatsoever. It doesn't matter. It's not important. It has nothing to do with the point here. Your test levels do not matter unless you're below range, and then you seek a doctor's assistance. 600 ng/dl is not low, not even remotely close. And you can make gains. Please forget about the 'average' test levels. Nothing about that relates to or even is within the realm of comprehension that would lead to justifying a cycle.


    I will put my diet up when I get a spare moment. Thanks but having read many nutrition books I am 99% sure it is spot on (not trying to sound arrogant at all)
    Makes sense. I am 100% confident you will benefit from the critique you will get. Also not trying to sound arrogant.


    I am not trying to be argumentative but would just like clarification on one point... it was my understanding that the post in the sticky about structure/tendon development was based on the notion that your structure develops through lifting heavier weights rather than the weight of the individual themselves; i.e through years of heavy lifting and compound exercises your tendons etc strengthen meaning that it is imperative to have good lifts rather than actually weigh a lot. Your post identifies that I would not be able to handle the strength gains (rather than weight gains)... my lifts are already near their natural limit (see above - e.g 225 bench x 10) so in that regard shouldn't I be fine? Weight gain shouldn't be a problem because people often gain 30lbs on cycle (albeit including water weight). So I thought I would be in a better position than say the average lifter who benches 180 but weighs more than me and gets on the juice?
    Yes, years of natural lifting. Not years of injecting yourself. If you feel you're maxed out at your age and size... then there's a major problem (not small, major) with your diet. It's possible that your diet is great, but diets don't work forever, we have to change them often because the cease to work after a while. This goes for both cutting and bulking. Almost every objection we've had so far is diet related. I don't think that you're understanding the magnitude here. And to be honest, toilet, 22 years of age, there is no way on Gods green earth that you have enough experience to say your diet is great with such confidence. No way. You will believe me 5 years from now.

    If starting a cycle on a low weight is unhealthy do you then advise me to gain weight first. I have a twin brother and he currently weighs 178 at 17%bf and Im 154 at 8%. I used to be around his weight but have been cutting the last 3-4 months because I thought you got the most gains if you start a cycle as lean as possible? Im really confused now :/ I can quite easily utilise my firing metabolism and 'carb up' for a month and start at maybe 165 11%?
    You obviously know how to cut. It's not easy to get to 8% for most folks. So yes, I'm not concerned if you gained some weight, so long as most of it is lean. The more you lean mass you can add the better. You're not going to die from a cycle, but you could much better your chances of a successful cycle if you add more lean mass.

    Again, why are you in such a hurry? What is so incredibly important that you must cycle today, or next month? I ask because all your objections scream 'I want to hear someone say go for it'. Plenty of people will tell you to go for it. It's just not smart. We still don't have anything indicating full development yet, so nothing to overcome there. No diet critiqued, nothing to overcome there. Kinda back to square one with my first reply.

    Hope none of that sounded harsh, not the intent. And I really and truly believe that you have a great head on your shoulders, otherwise I wouldn't spend this much time in this thread.
    Last edited by austinite; 06-19-2013 at 06:05 PM.
    ~ PLEASE DO NOT ASK FOR SOURCE CHECKS ~

    "It's human nature in a 'more is better' society full of a younger generation that expects instant gratification, then complain when they don't get it. The problem will get far worse before it gets better". ~ kelkel

  17. #17
    Chx beach 79's Avatar
    Chx beach 79 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    East Coast: on the beach
    Posts
    1,287
    Great Read! The honesty is refreshing!!!

  18. #18
    toilet is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    201
    What is your point with test levels? What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? No, you will not have 1500 ng/dl as a teen or in your 20's. I don't really care what others are telling you... I'm telling you that if you're in a decent range, leave it there. It is not relevant whatsoever. It doesn't matter. It's not important. It has nothing to do with the point here. Your test levels do not matter unless you're below range, and then you seek a doctor's assistance. 600 ng/dl is not low, not even remotely close. And you can make gains. Please forget about the 'average' test levels. Nothing about that relates to or even is within the realm of comprehension that would lead to justifying a cycle.
    I was merely trying to rebut the point made on one of the 'cycling for the young' threads. The point made basically was that as a young male you have high natural test and should take advantage of that before cycling. Some members even went so far to say that the test of a teenage is like being on a mini cycle. Only point of my post was to show that this is incorrect and that the difference between a young and middle aged man is minimal

    With regards to my diet;

    I'm currently trying to cut as muscle sparingly as possible (started out 500 below maintenance but lost weight too fast). Now cutting at 300 below maintenance on 2230 cals 200p/200c/70f. I make sure I hit all my micronutrients/15g of fiber per 1000 calories, get my vitamin c, magnesium, potassium, iron etc from wholefoods. Don't believe in multivitamins because you just piss it out anyway but I supplement with zinc/copper since zinc is hard to come by in diet. All my carbs are low GI (pretty much vegetables and oats) except high GI carbs preworkout. I refeed once a week on 200p/400c/70f for leptin levels.

    I track what I lift each week and make sure I do the same lifts every week so I dont lose muscle mass (seem to be losing it anyway). I track my body fat % every week (jackson pollock 3 point method with calipers) and put that in an excel sheet along with daily weight and all the other info then change my weekly calories as metabolism adjusts. Just not losing any more fat carb cycling never seems to work... could keto but that never seems to be muscle sparing for a crazy ecto

    When I bulk its 3500 cals 40c/30p/30f split.. get all my micros in at around 2400 cals then the remainder of calories I just IFFYM (so bit of junk food there).

    Reason I want to cycle now; feel like my youth is running out and to to be shredded and have fun enjoy life before college ends and im forced into the monotony of 9/5 shit life. Being low BF% at my weight sucks because when you have no muscle mass it looks really sht - with a good 10lbs of lean muscle mass on me I would look so much better...
    Last edited by toilet; 06-19-2013 at 06:31 PM.

  19. #19
    austinite's Avatar
    austinite is offline HRT Specialist ~ AR-Platinum Elite-Hall of Famer ~
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Cialis, Texas
    Posts
    31,154
    I don't believe in multivitamins either. But you don't piss everything away. You can increase macronutrient metabolism by dosing vitamins/minerals properly. But that's another topic.

    Youth running out at 22? Man. What's gonna happen to you when you're 40?

    Give yourself some credit man. 8% is not easy to achieve, you have an edge over everyone else.

    Whatever you decide, best of luck to you.
    ~ PLEASE DO NOT ASK FOR SOURCE CHECKS ~

    "It's human nature in a 'more is better' society full of a younger generation that expects instant gratification, then complain when they don't get it. The problem will get far worse before it gets better". ~ kelkel

  20. #20
    toilet is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    201
    Yeah I heard some vitamins can be taken with others to retain nutrients but I really cbf with that. Wholefoods are much better. Zinc is the only essential one IMO because so hard to get enough from food.

    Yes I will stick around and try and learn as much as I can. Thank you for the advice.

    Looking to find the safest possible cycle with as little sides - dont want to throw many compounds in when I dont know my own body. But so far seems 500mg-600mg a week test prop for 10 weeks is the best option.

  21. #21
    austinite's Avatar
    austinite is offline HRT Specialist ~ AR-Platinum Elite-Hall of Famer ~
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Cialis, Texas
    Posts
    31,154
    Quote Originally Posted by toilet View Post
    Yeah I heard some vitamins can be taken with others to retain nutrients but I really cbf with that. Wholefoods are much better. Zinc is the only essential one IMO because so hard to get enough from food.

    Yes I will stick around and try and learn as much as I can. Thank you for the advice.

    Looking to find the safest possible cycle with as little sides - dont want to throw many compounds in when I dont know my own body. But so far seems 500mg-600mg a week test prop for 10 weeks is the best option.
    Oh we strongly agree to disagree Besides, zinc suffers without sufficient Vitamin C presence. Also copper levels drop when C/Zinc are utilized, so you have to get the 3 in a decent ratio. Food will not get you there.

    Good luck.
    ~ PLEASE DO NOT ASK FOR SOURCE CHECKS ~

    "It's human nature in a 'more is better' society full of a younger generation that expects instant gratification, then complain when they don't get it. The problem will get far worse before it gets better". ~ kelkel

  22. #22
    toilet is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    201
    I haven't looked into that too much... I have 1000mg vitamin c, 40mg zinc 2mg copper daily. Always forget to take the vitamin c though but thanks ill look into it!

  23. #23
    kelkel's Avatar
    kelkel is offline HRT Specialist ~ AR-Platinum Elite-Hall of Famer ~ No Source Checks
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    East Coast Dungeon
    Posts
    29,627
    Toilet: Outstanding post. Well thought out. Probably one of the best I've seen on this topic coming from someone your age. Couple of questions for you though. You need to define your goals here. Do you want to be ripped or do you want to gain muscle? They don't always work together well for all people. Especially if patience is a factor. You stated that you are an ectomorph. If a true ectomorph what you gain (albeit hard) will usually be LBM. My point is only that I'm sure you are lean enough when you are 175lbs at 15% BF. Why the desire to be ripped unless you have a contest coming? I'm a natural ecto myself. Gaining can be tough but what you do gain is usually quality. Not a bad trade off IMHO. And I started around 153lbs and have been up to around 250lbs.

    I don't believe anyone has touched on how you train, unless I missed it. Only what you eat. Maybe that area needs examining as well. Progress in this sport/endeavor is multi-faceted. I would strongly recommend reading Marcus's Diary in the Lounge for some modern training methodologies that may spur some new growth for you. Combine that with some help from the nutrition guru's and I'd bet you are on your way to great improvements. You obviously have the intelligence so lets get all cylinders firing at once here for you.

    Oh, and when you talk to Austin about vitamins/supplements you are getting advice from probably the best we have here on the topic. Take it seriously.

    @Austin: Impressive to say the least.
    Last edited by kelkel; 06-19-2013 at 07:31 PM.
    Java Man likes this.
    -*- NO SOURCE CHECKS -*-

  24. #24
    toilet is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    201
    My goal is 170lbs 6% and be able to maintain that year round (wishful thinking I know). I figure once I get there I can lean bulk at 200 over maintenance and do small cuts as needed to maintain my size and leanness. Wow 250lbs from 153 is really impressive! must have taken a lot of hard work. That's insane!

    I will definitely have a look into the training lounge; dabbled with starting strength, did wendler 5/3/1 for nearly a year and done some hypertrophy specific training but I'm usually guilty of sticking with what I like for far too long so that could be wear I am failing for sure.

    I will definitely take Austins advice on board. Went and took my vitamin C after Austin mentioned it Maybe I have been messing up my zinc supplementation and failed in that regard; read a poliquin article once about how 99% of athletes are zinc deficient and small changes in their micros made drastic effects on their lifts.

  25. #25
    Chx beach 79's Avatar
    Chx beach 79 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    East Coast: on the beach
    Posts
    1,287
    Quote Originally Posted by toilet
    My goal is 170lbs 6% and be able to maintain that year round (wishful thinking I know). I figure once I get there I can lean bulk at 200 over maintenance and do small cuts as needed to maintain my size and leanness. Wow 250lbs from 153 is really impressive! must have taken a lot of hard work. That's insane!

    I will definitely have a look into the training lounge; dabbled with starting strength, did wendler 5/3/1 for nearly a year and done some hypotrophy specific training but I'm usually guilty of sticking with what I like for far too long so that could be wear I am failing for sure.

    I will definitely take Austins advice on board. Went and took my vitamin C after Austin mentioned it


    Is the young & steroids overstated on this forum-image-1309635301.jpg

    I got down to 6.5% for a while and it felt like I was sick the whole time. IMO you don't want to stay there to long. I feel way better and am much healthier between 8-10%

  26. #26
    toilet is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    201
    Yeah that is true. I don't mind as long as I look good in the mirror. I think even 10% can look acceptable if you have enough LBM.

    Mind you I don't think I'll ever get to 6% naturally - I can't even use an EC stack because I am hypersensitive to caffiene (glass of coke makes my heart beat crazy). All I've really got to work off is diet. What did you do to get to 6 if you don't mind me asking? As an ecto I have to kind of keep my carbs up - if i try carb cycle/keto within a week I look like I just came out of Auschwitz.

  27. #27
    Chx beach 79's Avatar
    Chx beach 79 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    East Coast: on the beach
    Posts
    1,287
    Quote Originally Posted by toilet
    Yeah that is true. I don't mind as long as I look good in the mirror. I think even 10% can look acceptable if you have enough LBM.

    Mind you I don't think I'll ever get to 6% naturally - I can't even use an EC stack because I am hypersensitive to caffiene (glass of coke makes my heart beat crazy). All I've really got to work off is diet. What did you do to get to 6 if you don't mind me asking? As an ecto I have to kind of keep my carbs up - if i try carb cycle/keto within a week I look like I just came out of Auschwitz.
    I am a ectomorph as well. It was just test, diet and cardio. I did lose a good amount of muscle though. If I stay at 8-9% I still look ripped and can keep some size on. It wasn't until I hit 30 yrs old that I could really build muscle. I went from 6'3' 185lbs. To 220lbs. Without AAS. I did first cycle last year at 32 yrs old. Now I am at 240lbs. 9.5-10% bodyfat and leaning out slowly.

    Keep it up and good luck!
    toilet likes this.

  28. #28
    toilet is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    201
    oh youre huge good job man. Maybe I should use test for a cut so its as muscle sparing as possible (gonna have to bulk first though and really only want to do 1 cycle and dont want to waste it on a cut) At my weight I dont even look like a lift so being really low bodyfat is pointless Ive come to realise. Thanks! Inspiring

  29. #29
    Lunk1's Avatar
    Lunk1 is offline aka "JOB"
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    METHAMERICA
    Posts
    16,392
    Quote Originally Posted by toilet View Post
    oh youre huge good job man. Maybe I should use test for a cut so its as muscle sparing as possible (gonna have to bulk first though and really only want to do 1 cycle and dont want to waste it on a cut) At my weight I dont even look like a lift so being really low bodyfat is pointless Ive come to realise. Thanks! Inspiring
    Some of the most well thought out and researched posts by someone who is trying to justify cycling when they shouldn't. I wonder if near as much energy was expended researching the possible pitfalls and if equally as much consideration was given to the info those searches yielded?

    You seem way to intelligent to blow of the risks for the small rewards that can undoubtedly be gained in a safer manner. Way to smart to believe that ONE cycle will allow you all you desire along with the ability to keep the gains. VERY FEW ppl who say they want to do one cycle...actually do.

  30. #30
    Grizzly Live is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    America
    Posts
    69
    I don't think so. Although I have been cycling since I was a freshman in highschool off a cycle (out of my system) my t levels were 798 total, that's on the higher side of the scale I think so it may just be luck. Or genetics but I'm fine. HOWEVER if I could go back I would have waited until I was 25 at least

  31. #31
    Chx beach 79's Avatar
    Chx beach 79 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    East Coast: on the beach
    Posts
    1,287
    Quote Originally Posted by toilet
    oh youre huge good job man. Maybe I should use test for a cut so its as muscle sparing as possible (gonna have to bulk first though and really only want to do 1 cycle and dont want to waste it on a cut) At my weight I dont even look like a lift so being really low bodyfat is pointless Ive come to realise. Thanks! Inspiring
    The majority of my gains were done naturally and took a good while to achieve.

  32. #32
    toilet is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    201
    Some of the most well thought out and researched posts by someone who is trying to justify cycling when they shouldn't. I wonder if near as much energy was expended researching the possible pitfalls and if equally as much consideration was given to the info those searches yielded?
    Thanks man. I have been researching trust me... I have been searching these forums and cannot find any threads in which a young person has taken a sensible first cycle (e.g test prop/test e) with the proper PCT protocol and bloodwork and has come out with problems. All of the threads were idiots taking crazy cycles with no PCT or a half assed one.

    I don't think so. Although I have been cycling since I was a freshman in highschool off a cycle (out of my system) my t levels were 798 total, that's on the higher side of the scale I think so it may just be luck. Or genetics but I'm fine. HOWEVER if I could go back I would have waited until I was 25 at least
    What cycles did you do/PCT? I don't see why you have any regrets if youre 798 ng/dl you havent suffered any sides. Maybe they should make a thread about where cycling for the young has worked because you seem to be fine. People seem too ready to castigate the young for cycle choices but when a middle aged man is blastin and cruisin/taking oral only cycles no one seems to bat an eyelid? Only been around here a week but this just seems silly...

  33. #33
    toilet is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    201
    Thanks beach. I've been gyming 5 times a week since 17 - now nearly 23. Getting impatient

  34. #34
    Times Roman's Avatar
    Times Roman is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Back from Afghanistan
    Posts
    27,383
    Quote Originally Posted by toilet View Post
    Thanks for your reply Roman.

    I sure you appreciate what it is like to be young and always wanting a reason WHY. I know I may come across as argumentative but that is not my intention. Like every young person I just want clearly explained reasons rather than just being told no. So of course I read the stickies and then try and argue against the points raised in them.

    Hypothetically; If you are under 25 BUT; 1. have been training 5+ years 2. Have solid nutrition 3. Have checked with an endocrinologist to ensure your development is in check 4. Have had blood work done pre/post cycle 5. Follow a test only cycle with proper PCT - are you at as good a chance as any for nothing to go wrong?
    FYI im 23 in 3 months.
    1 is irrelevant to the discussion. this is not a muscular concern
    2 this is not a nutrition concern
    3 an endo will not be able to tell if your hormonal system is finished with it's development. If you don't believe me, look it up and tell me I'm wrong. And if it were possible, it would be very expensive. They can check your hormone levels, but that is not the same thing. Say your test levels are currently at 500. Who's to say in six months, it won't rise to 535? And checking your test levels is NOT the same thing as checking the maturity of your hormone system.
    4 good idea, but still, if your development halts due to exogeneous AAS usage, how would you be able to predict when it would have finished developing, unless you can either look into the future, or do a control study on yourself in two separate universes?

    I guess I just get a little "spent" from time to time. Nobody seems to want to wait, regardless the advice. There is an issue with real hard clinical data... there is none! The FDA would never approve a control study on AAS usage on kids your age. So you need to accept the maturity and wisdom of the advice we provide here. Because this is about as close as you are going to get.

    Instead of hard clinical data, we offer:

    anecdotal evidence
    first hand experience from members that have cycled too young and are experiencing problems now

    The bottom line is that this board is bombarded by youngsters that want to cycle too soon. You know, if I had $50 for each program I put together, then maybe I'd have more energy and answer the same questions day in and day out. But I volunteer here, trying to help out youngsters such as yourself. My son is your age, and if the tables were turned, (I'm assuming your dad doesn't know anything about steroids or working out, else you would have went to him first?), but if the tables were turned, i'd be extremely grateful if some old bull educated him and attempted to steer him in the right direction.

    Respectfully,

    ---Roman

  35. #35
    Grizzly Live is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    America
    Posts
    69
    Quote Originally Posted by toilet
    Thanks man. I have been researching trust me... I have been searching these forums and cannot find any threads in which a young person has taken a sensible first cycle (e.g test prop/test e) with the proper PCT protocol and bloodwork and has come out with problems. All of the threads were idiots taking crazy cycles with no PCT or a half assed one.

    What cycles did you do/PCT? I don't see why you have any regrets if youre 798 ng/dl you havent suffered any sides. Maybe they should make a thread about where cycling for the young has worked because you seem to be fine. People seem too ready to castigate the young for cycle choices but when a middle aged man is blastin and cruisin/taking oral only cycles no one seems to bat an eyelid? Only been around here a week but this just seems silly...
    To be honest I thought I had gyno but the doctor told me today I don't. And people on this forum try to steer everyone away from oral only cycles and for good reason. And all kinds of test , mdrol, Dbol ,var, deca , Winnie, eq, all kinds of shit except for tren .. I'm saving that for last. And pct of nolva and clomid. Although sometimes pct was only used for a week because my test kicks rate back up. And no HCG personally

  36. #36
    Lunk1's Avatar
    Lunk1 is offline aka "JOB"
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    METHAMERICA
    Posts
    16,392
    ^^^Wow..all of those well thought out cycles under your belt and your amazing ability to recover...you must be huge. Care to post a pic so we can see how great it's worked for you?

  37. #37
    Grizzly Live is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    America
    Posts
    69
    Quote Originally Posted by Lunk1
    ^^^Wow..all of those well thought out cycles under your belt and your amazing ability to recover...you must be huge. Care to post a pic so we can see how great it's worked for you?
    I do care to post a pic as this is a open forum in which anyone can view. And not that big only about 225-230 about 10-12%

  38. #38
    Lunk1's Avatar
    Lunk1 is offline aka "JOB"
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    METHAMERICA
    Posts
    16,392
    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzly Live View Post
    I do care to post a pic as this is a open forum in which anyone can view. And not that big only about 225-230 about 10-12%
    That's still pretty good size..no face is necessary.

  39. #39
    toilet is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    201
    Thanks again for the reply Roman.

    3 an endo will not be able to tell if your hormonal system is finished with it's development. If you don't believe me, look it up and tell me I'm wrong. And if it were possible, it would be very expensive. They can check your hormone levels, but that is not the same thing. Say your test levels are currently at 500. Who's to say in six months, it won't rise to 535? And checking your test levels is NOT the same thing as checking the maturity of your hormone system.
    Only been here a week but yes I am in the process of looking all of this up so I will keep you posted. It seems the endocrine system is quite expansive in that it includes your brain development also...obviously no way to test for this. But given that steroids don't inimically affect the brain (I guess you could include depression issues in there but those are a result of hormonal imbalances brought about by lost test and as such should be precluded from brain function). So hmm, at first glance to me it seems if they can ascertain that your hormones are settled and you have finished developing physically then you are good to go? Of course this is only at first glance and I'd appreciate any scientific evidence to the contrary.

    At any rate, there must be some way in which they can ascertain that your endocrine system stops developing at 25 otherwise they wouldn't have been able to make that statement in the first place. There will be some metric against which it can be measured I just have to do more research - any sub forum that discusses endocrine systems that would point me in the right direction?

    I completely agree with you that test levels are different to the maturity of your hormonal system... I'd merely use test levels pre and post cycle as a yardstick for damage. Though diet/ejaculation/sleep habits and stress levels can all affect test levels. I at least know of 1 guy who was 380 ng/dl and dramatically changed his diet (high in both omega fats and animal fats), implemented HIIT and reduced stress and 6 months later was 840 ng/dl. So yes not an exact science.

    Instead of hard clinical data, we offer:

    anecdotal evidence
    first hand experience from members that have cycled too young and are experiencing problems now
    And, with all due respect, that is half the problem. 99% of the threads against the young cycling were because they didnt follow PCT protocol rather than because they were young. I keep looking for threads where they followed things correctly and still got problems... found one

    The bottom line is that this board is bombarded by youngsters that want to cycle too soon. You know, if I had $50 for each program I put together, then maybe I'd have more energy and answer the same questions day in and day out. But I volunteer here, trying to help out youngsters such as yourself.
    I certainly appreciate how you feel Roman. I would feel the same way if I were you. And believe me I am grateful for every answer I get. But I know I won't rush into anything...I am just trying to intellectualise all of the reasons and work out how valid they are. And once I have all that sorted I will start with threads about what is the safest cycle etc (but of course I will research first and draw on the wealth of experience here with my questions). I am sure you can all appreciate that when I hear 'no' I can't just drop it until it makes sense. My dad has never worked out a day in his life. No use there.
    Last edited by toilet; 06-19-2013 at 08:41 PM.

  40. #40
    toilet is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    201
    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzly Live View Post
    To be honest I thought I had gyno but the doctor told me today I don't. And people on this forum try to steer everyone away from oral only cycles and for good reason. And all kinds of test , mdrol, Dbol,var, deca, Winnie, eq, all kinds of shit except for tren.. I'm saving that for last. And pct of nolva and clomid. Although sometimes pct was only used for a week because my test kicks rate back up. And no HCG personally
    wow... you are one lucky son of a bitch lol

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •