roger. adex.
Will you be running test as well as TA/dbol, or just that? ?
Interesting log. I will definitely keep reading this.
Aragon, I’ve been following OTS1 for long enough to know that it will be TA/dbol with no test. He is quite specific when outlining his plans and tends to use only 2 synergistic compounds at a time.
wow. didn’t realize I was predictable.
It will just be DBOL and TA. AR will be stimulated by tren, and estro levels being too low will not be a problem with dbol.
I don’t have a problem with multiple compounds in a cycle per se, as long as every compound has a purpose. Also, I won’t use 2 compounds at a time that I haven’t used before, so that I can have some idea of what each one is doing. If I had unlimited time and money, I’d run every compound solo, and then through all the permutations so as to determine exactly what works for me.
One thing I have noticed is that being “on” just about anything kills my appetite. Sorta counter-productive, but since mass isn’t a huge goal of mine at this point, I’m not sweating it TOO much
interesting. I would have figured some sort of test dose in there to keep up libido, which is said to take a huge hit from TA in absence of test. As always, interesting and I’m looking forward to reading more.
No, it’s not necessary, as it is a misconception that trenbolone itself reduces libido or that testosterone is necessary for libido.
The cause of low libido with trenbolone-only is low estrogen.
Dianabol supplies plenty of methylestradiol via aromatization.
Trenbolone provides plenty of libido-enhancing androgen effect.
The combination is excellent.
I find libido up with Tren.
I believe that Tren has no activity at the prog receptor (this is what i have read in numberous articles and seem to experience personally) which would lead to a lesser prolactin increase than Test - let alone something like Nandrolone.
The libido loss is due to a low estrogen level when used alongside non-aromatising drugs (as is common pre-contest which WAS the primary use for this drug when Negma still made it - Parabolan) and as such dbol sorts this.
Not only that but dbol is pro libido in me and many others too - the combination should be nice. 4 weeks at a decent dose would work wonders as a full cycle… 4 on 4 off 
I would love to run 4 on 4 off, though it would seem that this is not a reality. According to what I understand from BR (and please correct me if wrong) is that the pituitary remains sensitive to LHRH for 14 days, and therefore remains ready to produce LH for testicular stimulation, but becomes less so very quickly after that. This would make recovery significantly more difficult after a 4 week cycle.
I’ll run 2 on 2 off x2 and the general idea is that I would get less sides and quicker recovery with equal gains…
No, just not as extremely easy as at 2 weeks. No harder than for example at 8 weeks.
I view it as depending on the training program. If it so happens that because of the training program an interval such as 3, 4, or 5 weeks really fits in, with much less reason for wanting to have it extend beyond that, then it absolutely can be a good idea to do that compared to say 8 weeks (with the last one or more not so much being called for when considering the program) so as to be able to get back on that much sooner.
Or if for some other reason someone likes it, it is fine. I have happened to do a lot of 5 or 6 weeks, for example. Never three, but that’s just happenstance. For example if doing Smolov Jr (a three week program) and not being in a longer cycle anyway, why not four weeks – the 3 of the training program and an extra week for likely supercompensation.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
No, just not as extremely easy as at 2 weeks. No harder than for example at 8 weeks.
I view it as depending on the training program. If it so happens that because of the training program an interval such as 3, 4, or 5 weeks really fits in, with much less reason for wanting to have it extend beyond that, then it absolutely can be a good idea to do that compared to say 8 weeks (with the last one or more not so much being called for when considering the program) so as to be able to get back on that much sooner.
Or if for some other reason someone likes it, it is fine. I have happened to do a lot of 5 or 6 weeks, for example. Never three, but that’s just happenstance. For example if doing Smolov Jr (a three week program) and not being in a longer cycle anyway, why not four weeks – the 3 of the training program and an extra week for likely supercompensation.[/quote]
After reading a fair amount of L.Rea’s stuff… i have begun to follow similar protocols to him - of course with the majority adapted to specificity of the user - but i mean with shorter durations of drug used, with differing drugs used during the training specific mesocycles of a periodised plan.
So for example a 12 week lead up to a… say, strength show, with 3x4wk cycles ran with different but equally important and synergistic goals in mind (mass, strength and size maintenance and neural capacity).
That is an example i read a month or two ago but highlights it perfectly.
As for the two on, two off (i thought it was four?) - Bill correct me if i am wrong, but wouldn’t the gains from a single 4 week cycle be better than the potential gains from 2x 2week cycles (all else equal)?
Simply as it takes TIME for the body to build tissue, and the longer - within reason - the body has access to the higher than normal anabolic hormone levels (consecutively) the better.
I was under the assumption from your article on Meso that the benefit means is it is a safe way to use the drugs long term while maximising gains in relation to a lower incidence of sides - BUT it wouldn’t be as effective per year as choosing longer cycles (for the same dose and amount of time on) although the longer cycles bring a whole host of increased sides and lowered ability to recover.
One definite benefit is the inclusion of ones natural testosterone level of course. I used to find that after a break that my libido was best during the first 2-3 weeks before i was wholly suppressed.
Am i wrong in my assumption though bill? That it is more effective from a gains standpoint to stay on for 4, 5 or more weeks over 2?
(I mention it because OTS1 clearly believes the opposite so i wanted to check)
cheers!
good discussion.
[quote] Brook wrote:
I was under the assumption from your article on Meso that the benefit means is it is a safe way to use the drugs long term while maximising gains in relation to a lower incidence of sides - BUT it wouldn’t be as effective per year as choosing longer cycles (for the same dose and amount of time on) although the longer cycles bring a whole host of increased sides and lowered ability to recover.[/quote]
No, I don’t at all think it’s the case that cumulative effects are less that way, for same total time on per year and same total drugs used.
However, there’s far more comparison (because of how many doing each) between brief repeated 2 week cycles; 8 week and not drastically greater cycles; and “foolishly long” cycles than there is between 2 or 8 week vs say 3 or 4.
So I can’t rule out that maybe repeated 4 week cycles might not be more efficient, for same time on and same amount of drugs used per year, than either 2 week or 8 week. But neither do I have any evidence for it.
I also haven’t seen anything leading me to suspect it personally. It’s certainly an idea anyone can try that surely is not a substantially worse way to go, either. Except perhaps if the individual is a slow recoverer and recovers no better from 4 week cycles than from 8, but worse than from 2. Then it stands to reason it could be less effective over the long term for them. For a person with good recovery, not having rapid losses post cycle beyond water and glycogen, not having rapid strength losses, I don’t see a problem.
But what if NOT talking about a year… what if talking about just two 2week runs (with 2-4 weeks inbetween) vs. one 4wk run (maybe with the same 2-4wks after the cycle to match the time periods)?
When the anabolism action/reaction factors from training/diet/drugs have got the time to build new tissue and all those thousands of processes in anabolism in the 4 week run… but with two 2 week runs they are - simply put - interrupted from continuing the anabolic environment for 2-4 weeks and then there may also be a minute amount of regain necessary for the second period too…
Just speculation as you know - but a thought is it not?
Certainly a thought, certainly not without logic behind it and not an unreasonable one on the face of it.
Making that comparison (instead of the long term, repeated-cycles one I was considering before but didn’t have sufficient basis) there’s a lot to compare to, as one can compare the end point of the second of two 2-week cycles with the end-of-4th week point of longer cycles. It doesn’t at all seem the case that results are less. If anything the reverse.
just a thought: why not 1 on 1 off? or shoot, with short acting orals, every other day?
There is so far as I know a lack of practical results.
As for every other day, a limitation on that would be that the biological effect of AR activation has a duration of several days.
So in other words, the extra anabolism, or activities such as satellite cells fusing with existing muscle cells, that you enjoy today is not only the product of androgen levels being very high today, but their having been so the last few days as well.
I would expect that high dose every other day oral use would mimic the effect – not in terms of LH suppression but on muscle – of quite moderate dose continuous dose. By quite moderate I’d guess something like 350 mg/day (not because I can guess within 50 mg, but somewhere probably substantially under 500 mg/day but substantially over 250.)
Also I question whether such a protocol would ever give the liver time to fully heal, unless the idea is to use every other day and on top of that, for only a moderate number of weeks at a time and then some weeks off.
Besides that, except for those quite specifically wanting moderate results, when it comes to oral only steroid cycles, I say, just say no.
interesting… didn’t know that about androgen receptors… makes sense. It wouldn’t surprise me if the effect lasted even longer than a few days, I’ve made plenty of gains in the “off” weeks using this program.
You are thinking along the lines that you take the drug and they make you grow … as in direct proportion to the elimination life or something.
But it is soo much more involved than that.
To show you, read this article on muscle growth. It is advanced physiology in a lay-man format and explains in relative detail what the different types of muscle growth are, and how they are mediated and what action/reaction factors are necessary in order to set the cascade of events into place - and to maximise the result.
http://www.forbodybuilders.net/2009/05/how-does-a-muscle-grow-read/
This should help you see why it would not be optimal to dose just 1 week at a time, as the processes are so much more involved than simply dosing and growing.
I have read a hell of a lot on this sort of thing so i dont remember exactly what this one says - but i remember it being easy to understand and informative on the process of muscle anabolism - so it will help you construct training and steroid cycles more efficiently in relation to your own growth responses.
JJ
I think you’re right, when it comes to the ultimate ending point of at least some processes.
I wasn’t aware of the method by which satellite cells are differentiated. Interesting. Now the question becomes how to promote maximum damage to myosin/actin filaments, so that a maximal response can take place.
This means its time to call up Nautilus and become a HIT Jedi right?
I kid, I kid…