Pros and cons of EQ?

[McGregor]

What are the pros and cons of EQ? Do you like it and do you recommend it? I know that half of the weight of the compound is the ester weight and it has 14 day half life. I know a lot of people that like the compound because of it's dry quality gains and a lot of people don't like it because they don't feel it. Is it good enough?

[GearHeaded]

EQ is a great compound WHEN used within a proper setting/context. its more of a 'filler' or synergy drug then a stand alone. the only place its shines as a stand alone is on a cruise, example running 500mg of eq year round with just a little bit of test as your 'trt'.
what do I mean by "filler" drug ?

well lets say you normally would run 1000mg of test as your base for any cycle, and then you'd add your other compounds to that base to complete your stack. well instead of using all 1000mg of test, you can use a filler.. so say 400mg of test and 600mg of EQ, that gives you your 1000mg base. EQ works well for this being it is really nothing more then a 'cleaner' version of test (structurally its actually just injectible Dbol without the 17alk or estrogen conv).
whats the reason for running 400mg test and 600mg EQ rather then just simply 1000mg test as as base.. well the EQ fills in the gap of high dosage test without the excessive estrogen and DHT conversion. so you get much more mild side effects, mainly yielding just the anabolic benefits.

why does EQ make a great synergy drug? couple things
- its very similar to deca in its ability to promote collagen synthesis and synovial fluid retention in the joints, so it helps with joints on cycle (also why its used for race horses)
- it converts into an anti estrogenic enzyme . the longer you take EQ the more this enzyme builds up blunting estrogen and providing a slightly 'drying' effect to the physique.
- it doesn't convert to DHT.. thus it can be ran at very high dosages to get the anabolic benefits without a ton of DHT sides

a couple of different ways to use EQ
- as part of your "trt" or your cruise. you can run it year round. again its just a 'clean' version of test essentially
- as a filler. to add a strong base to a stack without having to run high dosage test as that base.
- as an anabolic in a long 12-16 week cycle , ran at say 600-800mg per week
- as an anabolic during one phase of a phase cycling protocol or compound rotation protocol, ran at 1500-2000mg per week for 6 weeks
- added into any cycle at lower dosage to get joint support effects.

more can be said but thats the jist of it

[PrimoCyp25]

Due to nature of Eq, and that it's a slower acting compoud, 14-16 weeks would be standard, also depends on how long have you been on a gear, for some even 200mg will have some positive effect without unnecessary overloading, you don't take Eq because you want gains yesterday, so don't expect deca like results.
Also since Eq promotes blood production, it will give you more vascular look, and it is one of few compounds that increases appetite in some.
It is an overall great gear on slower side.

[McGregor]

Is it good for someone going for the ripped, dry and vascular look?

[HoldMyBeer]

EQ is a great compound WHEN used within a proper setting/context. its more of a 'filler' or synergy drug then a stand alone. the only place its shines as a stand alone is on a cruise, example running 500mg of eq year round with just a little bit of test as your 'trt'.
what do I mean by "filler" drug ?

well lets say you normally would run 1000mg of test as your base for any cycle, and then you'd add your other compounds to that base to complete your stack. well instead of using all 1000mg of test, you can use a filler.. so say 400mg of test and 600mg of EQ, that gives you your 1000mg base. EQ works well for this being it is really nothing more then a 'cleaner' version of test (structurally its actually just injectible Dbol without the 17alk or estrogen conv).
whats the reason for running 400mg test and 600mg EQ rather then just simply 1000mg test as as base.. well the EQ fills in the gap of high dosage test without the excessive estrogen and DHT conversion. so you get much more mild side effects, mainly yielding just the anabolic benefits.

why does EQ make a great synergy drug? couple things
- its very similar to deca in its ability to promote collagen synthesis and synovial fluid retention in the joints, so it helps with joints on cycle (also why its used for race horses)
- it converts into an anti estrogenic enzyme . the longer you take EQ the more this enzyme builds up blunting estrogen and providing a slightly 'drying' effect to the physique.
- it doesn't convert to DHT.. thus it can be ran at very high dosages to get the anabolic benefits without a ton of DHT sides

a couple of different ways to use EQ
- as part of your "trt" or your cruise. you can run it year round. again its just a 'clean' version of test essentially
- as a filler. to add a strong base to a stack without having to run high dosage test as that base.
- as an anabolic in a long 12-16 week cycle , ran at say 600-800mg per week
- as an anabolic during one phase of a phase cycling protocol or compound rotation protocol, ran at 1500-2000mg per week for 6 weeks
- added into any cycle at lower dosage to get joint support effects.

more can be said but thats the jist of it

EQ, to my understanding, is something that needs to be ran at high doses to see any effects. Can you confirm?

Sent from my LG-LS993 using Tapatalk

[Ernst]

- its very similar to deca in its ability to promote collagen synthesis and synovial fluid retention in the joints, so it helps with joints on cycle (also why its used for race horses)

I have seen this pop up time and time again and I have never seen anything to back it up. Is this something where we have to settle for broscience or do you have info that I do not?

[Obs]

I have seen this pop up time and time again and I have never seen anything to back it up. Is this something where we have to settle for broscience or do you have info that I do not?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/1636855/

I hate pub med and the studies.
They are a joke.

Nearly all info on growing large off doses beyond trt level come from B-row si-unse based on the expansion of what was left by medical study.
These fuckers arent going home and spending thousands of hours studying collectively in a group like we do. They dont measure and monitor the results of a specific compound for years the way we do. They are not supreme beings and we have had m.d.'s on this board.

The freaking ignorant ass euros pushed pub med a little too hard.

What they call high doses in studies are shit I lose taking a piss.

If I go to an endo of any kind and get trt he will either prescribe zero hcg or test to be shot at a dosage that puts my hormones on what most call, a rollercoaster effect. That or I wont get AI, which is the scifi standard left behind by the ever so coveted stickies on this board.

"Bro science" beats the shiiiit out of oxford medical experiments any day. We have all their info and ten times the passion and time involved.

God help me I have never seen a medicine prescribed according to its half life not even pennicillin!

The faith put in the medical racket is past the point of stupid.

By the way ernst we are cool.
I was hust planning this rant for the next time I saw "bro science".

[Ashop]

What are the pros and cons of EQ? Do you like it and do you recommend it? I know that half of the weight of the compound is the ester weight and it has 14 day half life. I know a lot of people that like the compound because of it's dry quality gains and a lot of people don't like it because they don't feel it. Is it good enough?

I get really strong and veiny on EQ. Lean mass gains are nice as well. My only side effect that's an issue is the increase in RBC/HEMOGLOBIN/HEMATOCRIT

[GearHeaded]

I have seen this pop up time and time again and I have never seen anything to back it up. Is this something where we have to settle for broscience or do you have info that I do not?

how many times have you ran EQ and for how long ? try cruising on EQ for 6 months and you'd probably never of asked that question

[Ernst]

how many times have you ran EQ and for how long ? try cruising on EQ for 6 months and you'd probably never of asked that question

So.... broscience. Okay.

Nothing wrong with that, really. That's a big part of why we are here, to share our experiences and create a knowledge base for ourselves and others to utilize. Kinda hard to find a lot of solid studies with AAS compounds used how we approach them. That said I do think it important to acknowledge when we have made this leap. We always have to take these things with a grain of salt.

I have run EQ once, many years back. I went straight on to 800mg/wk because I had been advised that it was weaksauce but served some use at higher doses. I experienced the hunger side effect as something more like a uncomfortable blood sugar crash feeling and my blood got WAY too thick (keep in mind this was with drol and test). Dropped it altogether and never looked back. If I was to do it again I would run it lower, with a moderate dose of test alongside and nothing else, to see where that got me.

Respect.

[Obs]

So.... broscience. Okay.

Nothing wrong with that, really. That's a big part of why we are here, to share our experiences and create a knowledge base for ourselves and others to utilize. Kinda hard to find a lot of solid studies with AAS compounds used how we approach them. That said I do think it important to acknowledge when we have made this leap. We always have to take these things with a grain of salt.

I have run EQ once, many years back. I went straight on to 800mg/wk because I had been advised that it was weaksauce but served some use at higher doses. I experienced the hunger side effect as something more like a uncomfortable blood sugar crash feeling and my blood got WAY too thick (keep in mind this was with drol and test). Dropped it altogether and never looked back. If I was to do it again I would run it lower, with a moderate dose of test alongside and nothing else, to see where that got me.

Respect.

Agreed.
I have noticed in the past year most pubmed articles reqquire membership to see the full article such as the link I posted.