I'm in 200mg/week Trt but want to run a blast, just curious how big of a difference there would be between 400 and 500 a week in results.
I'm in 200mg/week Trt but want to run a blast, just curious how big of a difference there would be between 400 and 500 a week in results.
30% BF is double the recommendation 4 cycling bro. If u cycle b4 u get under 15%, u run a much greater risk of SEVERE gyno. Just curious, how did u end up @ 30% BF with 15 years training experience? I know it sounds like I'm talkin sh!it, but I'm not, I swear. It just seems like some1 with that much time in the gym, would b in better shape. Wut does ur routine & diet look like?
Last edited by The Bear 79; 10-04-2011 at 08:26 PM.
agree wit with bear, get that % down beforehand, your trt will hold your muscle nicely in a cal deficit to burn off the fat
If you are indeed above 20% bodyfat I wouldnt risk it. Ive had gyno come on very quickly when I cycled around 16-18% because I didnt bump my AI as well. Had a bitch of a time getting it under control and it somewhat ruined my cycle.
And to answer your question, theres not much anyone could tell you. Some people get away with tiny doses and some need high doses. We cant really say you will gain X more muscle on 500mg then 400mg, far to many factors.
Thanks for the feedback. My weight has cycled a lot in the last year from 240 to 218 (low carb, 70 work weeks, little to no exercise) up to 265 (4k cals , 350 protien targets and doing squats, bench, deads mainly) and back down to just under 240 (aerobics,weights, low carb) still likely over 20% BF though. Don't think it is at 30% any more but still too fat anyway. TheOriginally Posted by Sector
So is gyno the main issue? Not trying to change anyones opinion here, just curious. I have arimidex and nova for gyno.
Will hold on for a bit and see, just building up reserves from the Trt.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)