Steroid Compounds: When/Why?

[Serotonin]

I've seen more people than I can count talk about people using only Test E for their first cycle and others say Tren should be reserved for people who have done other cycles first.

Now, I'm pretty cynical anyways so most of the "guidelines" I read from internet forums I take with a grain of salt or write off as bullshit since most of us aren't experts, myself included. There are some educated people that make some very nice educated guesses and for some protocols and what not, very useful information can be gleaned from half the steaming piles of horse shit you find.

My question is this, excluding novices and those who could really benefit more from a diet reform than AAS, why would you recommend Test only for first cycles and other compounds for later cycles? If a person truly does a vast amount of research and understands PCT, dosing, and dieting and is already a veteran at bodybuilding in general, how does it matter if they use Tren for a first cycle or for their 4th cycle?

If its sides people are concerned about, taking Test isn't going to tell you whether or not Tren is going to wreck you. Receptor saturation and up/down regulation shouldn't be a factor either because I'm not talking about cruising.

My first cycle was Test/Deca/Halo and I had some AWESOME gains and really it was the experience of a lifetime. I'm quite thankful I chose and used the compounds I did (with the exception of halo... I'll never buy it since the cost outweighs the gains imo). I read what everyone said about taking test only and it just didn't really make sense to me. I've had my fair share of physiology courses and I'm not a total newb when it comes to how things work and I just don't see what the difference is.

So!, if you have some hard evidence as to why things should be the way most say... please share because I'm curious and would like to know.

[chuckt12345]

i think its more about if something goes wrong or you get sides you know what compound is causing it. If you just start out with 3 and you get f'd up you wont know which one is messing with you

[androbolic_09]

Test is your own natural hormone, so it should be the base of a cycle. You want to try test only first to see if your body can handle a mass amount of test in you, so you can have a a fall back if other compounds mess with you. If you dont do well with tren, and you stop, then you've wasted money, have to cut cycle short and use pct. But if your running test and you know it isnt messing with you (from past experience) then you can run test only for the rest of the cycle and still get gains. Plus, you can judge the andro sides with test, and multiply by five for tren basically. But some say that test can help with tren sides. But, hey, if u want to do tren, go for it. If your ok on it, then good for u!

[Serotonin]

Well, I'm wondering if there are reasons other than narrowing down sides since you can get kind of an idea of what sides to expect based off of the compound anyways.

[androbolic_09]

some compounds sides can overlap. would you really want to waste a cycle, time , and money on playing "guess that compound"? Plus everyone is different. Not everyone loses a few hairs, and gets sore nipples. People can lose patches of hair, develop gyno faster than a fat kid eating a reeses piece, and get a prostate the size of a cantaloupe.

[Booz]

imo the less you start out with the more room you have in future cycles if you understand my drift?
why run a gram of gear for your 1st cycle wether it be test only or test/deca/halo when you can start out 500mg test and then work upwards with either more test or other compounds which add the overall compound intake up..........
start small then you have more time to play before you get to a point where shedloads of gear dont do much for you..............
also strongly agree with the sides point to this...............

[Booz]

Well, I'm wondering if there are reasons other than narrowing down sides since you can get kind of an idea of what sides to expect based off of the compound anyways.

wrong most people will react differently to variouse different compounds mate....................

[Serotonin]

Well, there are specific sides to DHT, progestins, and test derivatives. Some overlap and some don't, all I'm saying is there is a good chance you can get a feel for whats causing the problem based off the symptoms. And I'm assuming if someone wants to run more than just test their first cycle they're willing to risk getting sides.

The only real reason that makes sense to me I guess is the idea of cycles and diminishing returns, but has that really been quantified in any studies? It seems obvious that androgen receptors can be saturated and down regulate but it doesn't seem likely that this would result in any permanent desensitization towards AAS if you're properly cycling with time off.

[androbolic_09]

Whatever. If your going to argue against what has been proven to be the best route to take, then go ahead and take your way. We're trying to help you so you dont **** up your body. We're already taking risks by doing steroids, why compound them? Like your already skydiving, why slam ur parachute bag against the wall 50 times?

[Serotonin]

Whatever. If your going to argue against what has been proven to be the best route to take, then go ahead and take your way. We're trying to help you so you dont **** up your body. We're already taking risks by doing steroids, why compound them? Like your already skydiving, why slam ur parachute bag against the wall 50 times?

I guess you don't understand the purpose of this post, if thats the case then don't contribute. I'm just asking the reasoning behind why people suggest light cycles to start, I understand the point of side effects and I'm asking if there are any other reasons.

Quoting you highlights the main point of my questions: "what has been proven to be the best route to take." I'm asking for the proof. I'm also not asking on my behalf, if I wanted to do tren my first cycle I would have. So lets move on.

[androbolic_09]

well. the proof is in peoples response. Its not really a scientific approach. Im not trying to be a dick. Its just that people are different. No one can pinpoint what will happen to them unless they'ce tried it, and then they might even react differently than before. So to answer your question, no, the sides are what causes people to tell others to wait and do test only. If you are 100% certain you wont do more than say 5-6 cycles or less, then try tren for first or second cycle. Its just that compounds range in effectiveness, so its just easier to start small and work your way up, instead of takin 5ml of shit every day just to gain a couple pounds on your THIRD cycle. Someone said this earlier, so i dont get flamed for gankin someones words.

[kfrost06]

Asking this question is the equivalent of taking morphine for a headache before trying an aspirin, getting drunk on grain alcohol before you try a beer, or teaching someone to drive using an indy 500 car. One needs to respect the gear they put in their system and respect their body, it's the only body you get, don't F it up. There will undoubtedly be the one that "can handle it" as if immune to side effects or danger. Never ever forget steroid can be dangerous, show them respect when you use them.

[Serotonin]

Asking this question is the equivalent of taking morphine for a headache before trying an aspirin, getting drunk on grain alcohol before you try a beer, or teaching someone to drive using an indy 500 car. One needs to respect the gear they put in their system and respect their body, it's the only body you get, don't F it up. There will undoubtedly be the one that "can handle it" as if immune to side effects or danger. Never ever forget steroid can be dangerous, show them respect when you use them.

I'm inclined to not agree with your analogies. Besides I'm not asking for these types of opinions... I really appreciate them guys but obviously this is stuff I already know and I'm sure its on the tips of the tongues of most of the people that read this.

In the search for studies or even case studies on AAS use, there isn't a HUGE amount of data to be found. I'm not trying to incite a debate I just want to know why people are so vehement about cycle progression. (aside from the possibility of getting undesirable sides)

[Merc..]

One reason is that you can gain very well on test at 400-500 mg EW on a first cycle. So why use a ton of diffrent compounds..

If you are talking about AR's it's fairly certain to say that the receptors do not downregulate and in fact they increase in density in the presence of more androgens. What causes growth to slow is the buildup of other reaction factors that helps the body to bring you back into homeostasis.

Merc.

[androbolic_09]

haha.. MONEY. Test dont cost that much, build urself up, cut, and win comp money, then get more juice, and repeat, but add more stuff!! lol. J/K

[mkv213]

I can see where you're coming from, I've often wondered the same thing myself about the "first cycle". I think I was doing 100mg Tren ED by my second cycle. I guess it really narrows down to if you're planning on long term AAS use (years) or just going for a couple cycles to look good for the summer.
We all (or most of us) know the risks we are taking using these compounds. (Hopefully). But IMHO all in all, it really doesn't matter what you take or which cycle you take it. Either way...when you come off cycle, as time passes, you need to maintain those calories to maintain your muscle mass or it's all money, time, gear, and effort down the toilet (literally).

I've been 245lbs lean as f*ck, then a year later after no gear, no gym, eating like sh*t.... I was at 205 looking like I had never hit the gym in my life.

As the years pass, you realize that the gear only assists, it's diet and training that are key.

[Serotonin]

Yea I hear ya mkv. Personally, I had little sides on my first cycle. Only thing that bothered me was the acne I got but nizoral cleared it up nicely. Stopped using an AI a quarter into the cycle and never developed any gyno at all. Didn't even get nipple tenderness.

I'm almost at the ideal weight I want to be at for fighting so I'm thinking I'll do tren on my second cycle and toss in masteron at the end and aside from a cutter or maintenance cycle there will be nothing left to do. If I went into the heavyweight class I'd have to gain nearly 60lbs and that would be one hell of an undertaking.

[Big]

One reason is that you can gain very well on test at 400-500 mg EW on a first cycle. So why use a ton of diffrent compounds..

If you are talking about AR's it's fairly certain to say that the receptors do not downregulate and in fact they increase in density in the presence of more androgens. What causes growth to slow is the buildup of other reaction factors that helps the body to bring you back into homeostasis.

Merc.

good post merc.
thoughts?

[PEWN]

One reason is that you can gain very well on test at 400-500 mg EW on a first cycle. So why use a ton of diffrent compounds..

If you are talking about AR's it's fairly certain to say that the receptors do not downregulate and in fact they increase in density in the presence of more androgens. What causes growth to slow is the buildup of other reaction factors that helps the body to bring you back into homeostasis.

Merc.

good post....

[Mr Tick]

Good topic!! Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 19 (11 members and 8 guests)

I also have wondered about this. Some good answers here too. Im looking forward to some more of the big vets to post up some of their thoughts.

[Serotonin]

One reason is that you can gain very well on test at 400-500 mg EW on a first cycle. So why use a ton of diffrent compounds..

If you are talking about AR's it's fairly certain to say that the receptors do not downregulate and in fact they increase in density in the presence of more androgens. What causes growth to slow is the buildup of other reaction factors that helps the body to bring you back into homeostasis.

Merc.

Well, I guess my question would be what causes the difference in results from a cycle then? If adequate time were to be given in between cycles and there is no AR downregulation, then why would there be a need to do anything but Test unless of course other compounds with test rendered better results? Further, if there is a difference and more successful and more potent chemicals then why wouldn't you just add them sooner? (disregarding of course the desire for different results like cutting/bulking/hardening)

In the long run it seems the most permanent and detrimental thing from cycling is the rebound of the HPTA. I guess I'm just trying to say that knowing you do damage to that mechanism, why not get the MOST out of a cycle since you get shut down no matter what?

This is kind of leading to more questions but really awesome info so far. Thanks guys!

[Merc..]

Well, I guess my question would be what causes the difference in results from a cycle then? If adequate time were to be given in between cycles and there is no AR downregulation, then why would there be a need to do anything but Test? Further, if there is a difference and more successful and more potent chemicals then why wouldn't you just add them sooner? (disregarding of course the desire for different results like cutting/bulking/hardening)

Different compounds have different actions why would you disregard this??

You answered your own question. Cutting / bulking/

Merc.

[Serotonin]

I meant for compounds of similar action, i.e. bulking with test and nandrolone. If there aren't diminishing returns then obviously test would be sufficient, unless adding other compounds made it better, and if thats the case then why wouldn't one want to add it from the start if it will render better results and alleviate the need for an additional cycle?

[Merc..]

Well, I guess my question would be what causes the difference in results from a cycle then? If adequate time were to be given in between cycles and there is no AR downregulation, then why would there be a need to do anything but Test unless of course other compounds with test rendered better results? Further, if there is a difference and more successful and more potent chemicals then why wouldn't you just add them sooner? (disregarding of course the desire for different results like cutting/bulking/hardening)

In the long run it seems the most permanent and detrimental thing from cycling is the rebound of the HPTA. I guess I'm just trying to say that knowing you do damage to that mechanism, why not get the MOST out of a cycle since you get shut down no matter what?

This is kind of leading to more questions but really awesome info so far. Thanks guys!

Yes it will shut you down but why unnecessarily use tons of different compounds? Like I said you can achieve alot using test at 400-500 mg EW for a first cycle , why not take advantage of that ? Plus diet and training are going to be the determining factor on what you gain and what you dont, not adding tons of compounds on a first cycle.

Booz also pointed out it leaves you some room for future cycles. I mean if you start with tons of compounds on your first cycle whats your 5th cycle going to look like . ( see what I mean ??)


Merc.

[Merc..]

I meant for compounds of similar action, i.e. bulking with test and nandrolone. If there aren't diminishing returns then obviously test would be sufficient, unless adding other compounds made it better, and if thats the case then why wouldn't one want to add it from the start if it will render better results and alleviate the need for an additional cycle?

You lost me ...

Deca is a progestin .



Merc.

[Serotonin]

I guess I'm not making sense right now... just finished studying and my brain is twitching from a long day. I guess my main point was yes, Test alone yields good results but couldn't they be better?

And as far as deca being a progestin, that shouldn't lose you, I was just stating that if one were to add it to test the bulking would be better.

[Merc..]

I guess I'm not making sense right now... just finished studying and my brain is twitching from a long day. I guess my main point was yes, Test alone yields good results but couldn't they be better?

And as far as deca being a progestin, that shouldn't lose you, I was just stating that if one were to add it to test the bulking would be better.

I was referring to you saying test and deca are the same..


Merc.

[HardCharger]

Both points kind of make sence to me. Now I'm not going to suggest to anyone to use tren for their first cycle, but maybe inform them about the other "lighter" componds out there. One thing I do know is that know matter what gear is suggested, propper PCT needs to be included. Hell, I've done a good number of cycles and still dont have a full grasp of it. I also know that if I knew then what I know now.... I'd have done it a little different (other/more componds).

[Amorphic]

I wouldnt suggest tren for a first cycle for any amateur for the simple fact that is a powerful compound and is highly androgenic. You dont just jump on board with the most powerful anabolics and treat them without respect. tren is strong stuff, the sides can be too much for someone that doesnt know what they are doing with aas.

Utilizing a test only cycle lets you understand how your body handles androgens, no 2 people are alike, which is why you start off slow and see how you respond to a baseline steroid.

[Merc..]

Bump !!


Merc.

[Stock]

IMO, most people just wont do their homework when they decide to get into gear. Most dont want to do the work, they just wnat to ask a question here or in the gym and get their answer. If you see all the newbie posts it supports my theory that most people are just plain lazy. By doing a test only cycle, they can ease into it while decreaing the chance of really hurting themselves.

[kfrost06]

I still don't get it. My first cycle I put on 28lbs and increased my bench by almost 100lbs. and that was at 12 weeks on 200mg/wk Is that not enough for most people? When your gains start laggin then you go up to the next step if you are willing to increase your risk and make no mistake about it, the more you do the more potent compounds you choose the more risk you are taking on. Why on Earth would anyone even consider jumping in head first with the most powerful compounds out there? However it's your body and you can/will do what you want to it, hopefully you will make educated decisions before you do.

[HardCharger]

I wouldnt suggest tren for a first cycle for any amateur for the simple fact that is a powerful compound and is highly androgenic. You dont just jump on board with the most powerful anabolics and treat them without respect.

I agree 100% The Idea of someone useing Tren for their first cycle is crazy.

To say that Test only is the best way to go for a person, is a little close minded. I know when I was first starting out I did more reserch on the short and long term side effects from steroid use than i did the acual effects of the different types. After every thing I read I made the choise that I was going to do it and I was willing to except all consquinses for my actions. Even though I was mentaly prepaired for any and all effects (good or bad) I still let some one talk me into doing a lighter cycle. Like I said, if I knew then what I know now... it would've been different.

If we're suggesting to people to stick with a test only cycle, so they can see how they'll react to it... then why dont we also start to suggest Test-A or Test-P cycles only as a good first cycle. The benifet is that if they do have sides then they could discountinue use and it'd clear their system faster(just like with Tren). Also, with the pain caused by the two defferent esters they might really think about if they want to continue useing or not. Just like everyone says "everyone is defferent" so even though test isn't a big deal to some, there's a chance it could wreak someone else.

All of this is just my opinion. Like my profile says, I'm an expert at what works for ME.

[Merc..]

I agree 100% The Idea of someone useing Tren for their first cycle is crazy.

To say that Test only is the best way to go for a person, is a little close minded. I know when I was first starting out I did more reserch on the short and long term side effects from steroid use than i did the acual effects of the different types. After every thing I read I made the choise that I was going to do it and I was willing to except all consquinses for my actions. Even though I was mentaly prepaired for any and all effects (good or bad) I still let some one talk me into doing a lighter cycle. Like I said, if I knew then what I know now... it would've been different.

If we're suggesting to people to stick with a test only cycle, so they can see how they'll react to it... then why dont we also start to suggest Test-A or Test-P cycles only as a good first cycle. The benifet is that if they do have sides then they could discountinue use and it'd clear their system faster(just like with Tren). Also, with the pain caused by the two defferent esters they might really think about if they want to continue useing or not. Just like everyone says "everyone is defferent" so even though test isn't a big deal to some, there's a chance it could wreak someone else.

All of this is just my opinion. Like my profile says, I'm an expert at what works for ME.

Why not suggest prop for a first cycle ??

Because alot of people dont like needles to start with , and with prop it needs to be pinned ED or at least EOD. Most people doing a first cycle are not not going to want to take shots ED or EOD.

Merc.

[chuckt12345]

Yea I hear ya mkv. Personally, I had little sides on my first cycle. Only thing that bothered me was the acne I got but nizoral cleared it up nicely. Stopped using an AI a quarter into the cycle and never developed any gyno at all. Didn't even get nipple tenderness.

I'm almost at the ideal weight I want to be at for fighting so I'm thinking I'll do tren on my second cycle and toss in masteron at the end and aside from a cutter or maintenance cycle there will be nothing left to do. If I went into the heavyweight class I'd have to gain nearly 60lbs and that would be one hell of an undertaking.

so your 145lbs?

[HardCharger]

Why not suggest prop for a first cycle ??

Because alot of people dont like needles to start with , and with prop it needs to be pinned ED or at least EOD. Most people doing a first cycle are not not going to want to take shots ED or EOD.

Merc.

Right! But if they're willing to take their health into their own hands by injecting strange new chemicals into their body....

I know that if I ran prop the first time... I probably wouldn't have done steroids again.

But back to the original question. If someone wants to use gear for the first time and also wants to run a stack, I dont see the harm of informing them on how to do it. I'm not saying to tell them to run a crazy four or five compound cycle. Maybe guide them towards something like Mast, either with the prop or enth ester. That surly wouldn't be too bad, and hell, it should help with sides. Npp even, it can be shot the same as Test-E, and as long as they knew all the info about sides and how to avoid/get rid of them, they should be good to go. Maybe insted of giving cycle advice to some one new, we should school them on the long and short term effects along with PCT and combating sides. Then after that we could help them decide on a cycle acording to their stats and goals. Maybe there should be a requirement to have have so many posts in the PCT section before they can post in here.... wait, if that was the case I probably would be posting in here either!

[magic32]

This thread raises a very good question, and I'm of the opinion that one should never be chastised for genuine inquisitiveness. However, the inability to assimilate new or different information because it is such would be tantamount to stupidity, so let us hope that's not the case here and that paradigm shifts are welcomed.

It appears that you're seeking a solitary definitive answer when the actual one is rather ubiquitous.
That is to say, several members (Booz, Merc, Kfrost, Amorph and Andro) have posited wholly valid INDEPENDENT reasons for the superiority of a the Test only first cycle, which you've repeatedly jettisoned with very little regard. If examined COLLECTIVELY, it becomes apparent that these reasons form a very compelling argument, as well as implicitly answer your question:

• The very nature of experimentation, with anything, dictates one begins low and progresses accordingly...Booz.
• Similarly, sides are variable and can be quite individual, thus knowing how you react to a single compound, and then slowly progressing into more elaborate cocktails is merely the application of wisdom...Androbolic.
  (note: there are far more possible side effects than the documented probable estrogenic ones. Evidence of this can be found in a search for "ALLERGIC REACTIONS".)
• As illustrated by Kfrost, Merc and Amorphic great success can be achieved with very little of this singular compound, making diversity and/or abundance immaterial at such an early stage.

------------

I guess my main point was yes, Test alone yields good results but couldn't they be better?

Possibly but not necessarily!

Based on the study of its development, which is strikingly similar to that of growth spurts in children, only so much muscle can be readily manufactured regardless of the compounds and dosages applied. Therefore, it would behoove one not to overdo usage, but rather adhere to a 'less is more' philosophy.

Additionally, as depicted by Booz above, one of the goals of aas use is longevity. Consequently, and I see from the disdain you held for Kfrost's very colorful analogies that you're not a fan of them, but nevertheless your suggestion is reminiscent of a distance runner who OVER exerts to gain an early lead...in a very very long race.

[Serotonin]

Chuck- I'm 198lbs now, and have been doing heavy cardio since after cycle I had a bit of bloat and was around 207 but I fall into the light heavyweight class. The 60lb gain would be to fall into the heavyweight class.

Magic- thank you for your reply. I guess I seemed to disregard their replies but that isn't the case at all. The info they gave is VERY good, however its things that most educated people would and should assume naturally. I'm not trying to make an argument, more or less just trying to find out as much about the subject as I can.

Each person is different, could I have made the gains I did with just test? Perhaps and perhaps not... I added deca for its supposed joint supplementation (which btw I had zero joint pain and even my ankles typical aching seemed to go away on deca which was awesome!) and increased bulking ability.

Still, we've all seen countless posts of people talking of a first cycle and getting instantly shot down if it isn't anything but Test 500mg a week. That seemed like a huge presumption to me and still I'm sure there's more empirical evidence that could push the subject towards either direction.

edit* Knowing what I do of most AAS, I wouldn't suggest tren for a first time. I'm mainly talking of dbol/deca etc... nice AAS that work well when stacked with test. Has anyone ever really even heard of people getting horrible sides from Deca?

[Amorphic]

This thread raises a very good question, and I'm of the opinion that one should never be chastised for genuine inquisitiveness. However, the inability to assimilate new or different information because it is such would be tantamount to stupidity, so let us hope that's not the case here and that paradigm shifts are welcomed.

It appears that you're seeking a solitary definitive answer when the actual one is rather ubiquitous.
That is to say, several members (Booz, Merc, Kfrost, Amorph and Andro) have posited wholly valid INDEPENDENT reasons for the superiority of a the Test only first cycle, which you've repeatedly jettisoned with very little regard. If examined COLLECTIVELY, it becomes apparent that these reasons form a very compelling argument, as well as implicitly answer your question:
The very nature of experimentation, with anything, dictates one begins low and progresses accordingly...Booz.
Similarly, sides are variable and can be quite individual, thus knowing how you react to a single compound, and then slowly progressing into more elaborate cocktails is merely the application of wisdom...Androbolic.
(note: there are far more possible side effects than the documented probable estrogenic ones. Evidence of this can be found in a search for "ALLERGIC REACTIONS".)
As illustrated by Kfrost, Merc and Amorphic great success can be achieved with very little of this singular compound, making diversity and/or abundance immaterial at such an early stage.
------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Serotonin
I guess my main point was yes, Test alone yields good results but couldn't they be better?

Possibly but not necessarily!

Based on the study of its development, which is strikingly similar to that of growth spurts in children, only so much muscle can be readily manufactured regardless of the compounds and dosages applied. Therefore, it would behoove one not to overdo usage, but rather adhere to a 'less is more' philosophy.

Additionally, as depicted by Booz above, one of the goals of aas use is longevity. Consequently, and I see from the disdain you held for Kfrost's very colorful analogies that you're not a fan of them, but nevertheless your suggestion is reminiscent of a distance runner who OVER exerts to gain an early lead...in a very very long race.

Very well put magic

[Amorphic]

edit* Knowing what I do of most AAS, I wouldn't suggest tren for a first time. I'm mainly talking of dbol/deca etc... nice AAS that work well when stacked with test. Has anyone ever really even heard of people getting horrible sides from Deca?

I agree with this to a degree. To me there are standards for first cycles, tren obviously not being one of them. Running deca or dbol as a kickstart in a first cycle seems fine to me. You may experience unexpected sides, but if you're going to start throwing compounds in the mix for your first time, deca or dbol i would consider to be alright.