Ok @unreal24278 here are labs on a guy that has been on TRT with us since the beginning. His anastrozole is mixed in with his T.
This is a trough reading, on a 7 day schedule:
No, itās not because they took too much or anything like that. Itās not just a matter of avoiding a crash of your E2. ANY REDUCTION IN E2, no matter the method, is detrimental to your protocol. Most of the benefits youāre looking for that TRT provides comes from E2! So lowering it, even just a little bit, is just ridiculous.
I challenge any of you to get your free T over 30, do daily administration, stop taking your AI (wean yourself off gradually over a period of time) and give your body time to adjust. If you donāt feel significantly better than you do now Iāll be shocked because every man who has winds up personally thanking me for changing his life. No bullshit!
Yes man I get it, more can get more gainz
If heās doing weekly injections, he isnāt optimized. He ISNāT.
On a 7 day schedule, you can run labs every day and wind up with a totally different result every day. Those labs are useless in my eyes.
My labs will look virtually the same every day. Thatās the difference.
Gainz? It isnāt a steroid cycle.
@dbossa @increasemyt
This is inherently true though is it not, animal models demonstrate oestrogen has an anabolic effect regarding more efficient nitrogen metabolism. Human studies demonstrate oestrogen allows skeletal muscle to maintain a more anabolic response post-exercise, may lower protein turnover etc.
Hence why certain anabolics despite having a high anabolic rating and no affinity for 3-HSD (hence no breakdown in skeletal muscle like DHT, mesterolone etc) have arguable less direct anabolic activity regarding hypertrophic stimuli (think stanozolol vs test). Also when thinking of lipids look at non aromatising vs aromatising compounds, stanozolol wouldnāt be a great example due to inherent hepatotoxicity and activation of hepatic lipase (catabolising HDL), but look at say testosterone vs metenolone, metenoloneās non aromatising nature leads to a far more detrimental impact on the lipid profile of the user using it. Then again itās also a synthetic derivative and thus open-ness to hepatic metabolism may be less than that of itās parent hormone, testoste-ā¦ although itās derived from DHT BUT! DHT is still a metabolite fo testosterone so my claim stands
Anyhow I have to study nowā¦ Fuck I hate studying for school, the shit they teach me here has little relevance to the rest of my lifeā¦ want me to listen in class? Teach me how to take out a mortgage or file for a fair divorce in which all my possessions wonāt be taken away. Teach me something useful dammit
There are outliers though, mg/mg oxandrolone is more anabolic than testosterone
1 Like
Hereās the funny thing. Take Dr Nicholsā¦ 99% of his patients have never been in a forum or know what E2 issues are. All are optimized. None have E2 issues. Interesting, right? Not just him. All the doctors in our group have reported the same. They do not have a SINGLE patient using an AI at this point. Let that sink in. They used to! They know better now.
@unreal24278 you need to make the distinction between bioidentical testosterone and synthetic testosterone derivatives. Not the same.
I feel ya. I wouldnāt go back to school if you paid me lol
Yes Stanazol and Oxandrolone wreck your lipids. Thats why we never did them when it was a big thing for TRT clinics to do.
bio-identical testosterone is a scam in my opinion though, people who market certain types of test as ābio identicalā do it so they can charge more for a supposedly āpremium productā which in reality is exactly the same as all other testosterone aside from being derived from soy, plant matter or whatever. Sure, the product they synthesise the testosterone from may be natural however in the end the result is the same hormone, testosterone and the body canāt differentiate where injectable testosterone came from.
That being said synthetic testosterone derivatives are a very different story, they actually are different in the way the body utilises them as theyāve been modified to behave differently from the parent hormone
1 Like
However, low dose nandroloneā¦ The stuff Iām seeing about this stuffā¦ Very interesting.
1 Like
I tried to explain this to him a while back.
Nandrolone is an interesting concept. I myself suffer from chronic pain, have since I was young. I tried NPP once for a short while (Iām rather irresponsible) and it helped tremendously. However the potential long term neurological, cardiovascular consequences put me off
However the next time I flare up badly Iām certainly going to utilise it again (like 60mg/wk)
1 Like
All testosterone is bioidentical. I was just making the point about natural vs synthetic. We are talking about Testosterone here.
1 Like
You didnāt need to explain as Iāve known this for years.
@unreal24278 even 100mg a week can do wonders for healing. They are almost comparing it to HGH at this point.
Laugh it up fat boy. More docs I know have started talking about nandrolone for their patients instead of HGH for joint health and overall healing. Not Dr Nichols though. He doesnāt go near that stuff.
Have you ever taken pharmaceutical grade GH before? Have you ever even taken Nandrolone?
That is the most ridiculous statement I have EVER heard. Nothing, I mean absolutely nothing compares to T and Gh together. Even at physiological dosages.
Its not 1 + 1 = 2
Its 1 + 1 = 10
Nope. Never. I have zero personal experience with it. Only the info that others share with me.
It is pretty great, cheaper than HGH too. However the potentially adverse cardiovascular and neurological consequences of the hormone need to be carefully weighed out before I use.
Iāve seen data, in vitro exposure too endothelial cells to massive concentrations of test or deca resulted in nandrolone induced deterioration of endothelial cells (induced apoptosis) at 11x lower concentration than that of testosterone, animal models demonstrate impaired vasodialation in response to exercise, screwed up antioxidant enzyme profiles and generation of oxidise stress etc. Granted these animals have different metabolism and elimination pathways to humans and in vitro conditions differ dramatically to that of actually what goes on inside the body as other variables cannot be accounted for, itās just a barrage of direct toxicity in vitro. Neurological consequences of nandrolone use are also concerning (esp for those who are younger, thereās already a large impact supra doses fo hormones have on the developing brainā¦ and possibly everyone given the data non structural abnormalities in brain structure from those who mega doseā¦ like 1000mg+/wk)
Thereās certainly some interesting data on nandrolone with regards to healing properties, and it appears to be tremendously efficient at combatting wasting and reversing nitrogen imbalance, even in low doses.
That being said personal anecdotes regarding use of nandrolone are incredibly concerning (talking about the neurological sides some experience). Animal models suggest nandrolone can cause neurological dysfunction lasting 6x the amt of time on, while this is a rodent study, it doesnāt take long to notice the adverse effects a certain subset of people acquire while on nandrolone, Iād hypothesise thereās a genetic factor.