
Originally Posted by
Turkish Juicer
I feel the urgent need to comment on AI use during a cycle and its relation to cholesterol after reading the comment above as well as having dealt with a member on the forum yesterday who made a similar comment that AI use may have its risks and dangers which may out weight its benefits.
I am an advocate of short cycles (6-8 weeks) and at this point, I don't feel the need to explain why.
A typical Arimidex dosage for a cycle that involves any aromatizing compound is 0.25mg EOD. For those who are sensitive to estrogen and if especially gyno prone, it is twice the dose, 0.5mg.
A 6 week cycle thus would result in one consuming of 5.25mg of Arimidex in total, which would be 7mg for an 8 week week cycle. For those who are estrogen sensitive and gyno prone, double the doses.
Aromatase inhibitors were neither invented nor intended for being administered by AAS users; however, there couldn't have been a more beneficial invention for juicers, especially considering the fact that we use Test as the base of every cycle and it is an aromatizing compound, which leads to excessively elevated estrogen levels in our bodies and biological design of male anatomy wasn't meant to deal with such high levels of estrogen. Elevated estrogen levels are dangerous for males besides the fact that estrogen itself is a estrogen class 1 carcinogen and for this very reason, ıt is indeed unjustifiable to discuss whether the employment of low doses of an AI during a cycle involves more risks than benefits.
My point here is, even those who are estrogen sensitive and hence feel the necessity the double the typical AI dosage, are in fact using very little AI. How did I leap to this conclusion? Well, studies state that in the medical field where patients are treated with an AI typical dosages often are that of the tablet (1mg for Arimidex, 25mg for Aromasin and so forth) and intake frequency is everyday, which refers to about 4 times the dose we typically recommend here and then there is the duration: patients stay on these AI protocols for months, some for years. Please utilize the Google search engine and look into these studies in which an incrementation of LDL cholesterol due to employment of an AI is portrayed before trying to further intellectualize this subject and should you recognize the already obvious high dosage and duration regarding the AI protocols these patients were submitted to.
In the last result, even those who run 12-16 cycles and follow a typical AI protocol as is advised on this board, should worry about neither the overall toxication nor incrementation of LDL cholesterol also because it would be an oxymoron for one to inject himself synthetic testosterone, which is not only a much more toxic compound than an AI on multiple levels but also actually is derived from cholesterol (meaning you are injecting yourself cholesterol). Thus, if you are worried about what little AI can do to you, why also not worry about AAS itself or just stop worrying about both?