Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Sides on shorter esters worse?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,016

    Sides on shorter esters worse?

    just curious with peoples perosnal history if its true that shorter esters produce harsher sides than faster acting esters? For example prop vs cyp. Doing lots of research lateley on prop and I have come across a couple threads saying acne, hair loss, and atrophy are all worse on prop. Anyone care to support or argue this claim? I know prop hurts a lot more to inject, that seems to be a very widely accepted principal.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    32,801
    the only thing i ever noticed a difference is tren
    If people can't tell your on steroids then your doing them wrong

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Back from Afghanistan
    Posts
    27,376
    this is the counter argument, that benefits on shorter esthers are better?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,016
    Quote Originally Posted by Times Roman View Post
    this is the counter argument, that benefits on shorter esthers are better?
    lol whaaaaat?

    if the original argument is "shorter acting ester's produce worse sides than longer acting esters" I beleive the counter argument to that is "shorter esters produce sides that are no worse, or equal to longer acting esters".

    sorry I don't understand your post times, maybe I am a little out of it today.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,016
    Quote Originally Posted by gixxerboy1 View Post
    the only thing i ever noticed a difference is tren
    I have heard tren is pretty harsh. Don't think i will ever have the balls to use that compound.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Back from Afghanistan
    Posts
    27,376
    sides are the other side of the coin to benefits (gains)


    we've had a variety of threads that claim shorter acting esthers provide better benefits, whether for cutting or gaining, than longer acting esthers.

    this is the first one in a while that ask whether or not shorter esthers reduce the incidence and severity of sides.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    13,506
    It makes no difference.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Anywhere...
    Posts
    15,725
    In regards to testosterone, I experience less sides on short esters, such as Prop over long esters Cyp and Enan.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    431
    Wouldn't short esthers an fast esthers be the same exact thing? Prop can be called fast or short right? I understand what your asking but I've read a lot about the different esthers and this is actually the first time I've read that anyone suggests that fast esthers produce worse sides than slow esthers.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,016
    Quote Originally Posted by Lil man View Post
    Wouldn't short esthers an fast esthers be the same exact thing? Prop can be called fast or short right? I understand what your asking but I've read a lot about the different esthers and this is actually the first time I've read that anyone suggests that fast esthers produce worse sides than slow esthers.
    I wasnt suggesting anything, I was asking a value neutral question.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,514
    Quote Originally Posted by Swifto View Post
    In regards to testosterone, I experience less sides on short esters, such as Prop over long esters Cyp and Enan.
    Same for me.

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
  •