Bill Roberts: Test Taper

Pharma / TRT
1 
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:

I don’t believe in tapers.

Why not either be making the most progress reasonably possible, or be in recovery mode?

Dosages such as say 150-250 mg/week accomplish neither.

Of course one can have a good result despite having a taper, but staying at the “gaining” dose level throughout the period one is going to be suppressed anyway will give better results yet.[/quote]

Actually, Bill, that taper we are talking about, developed by one of the very experienced members of this site, is considered “off” time, and is set up so that the user can go right back on as soon as the last dosage is complete.

This protocol usually lasts 12 weeks, consisting of a stasis period of 6 weeks at 100mgs of Test, followed by another 6 week gradual decrease from there, typically of 80, 60, 40, 50, 30, 20. The idea is to be in recovery mode the entire time, assisted by a very low dose of testosterone, which you are very slowly weaned off of.

I’m not qualified to talk about it from a scientific point of view, but anecdotally it has been used with terrific success by a large number of people who have basically all reported better mood, libido, and retention of gains than on standard PCT.

I’d be curious to see what you think of this, and hopefully if I have made any mistakes in explanation, some of the more knowledgable posters can correct me.

2

You know, I like P’s theory and all, and I even tried it last time. But in the end I didn’t start up on another cycle again, and although my nuts started to plump up during the taper I still needed PCT to get back to normal.

My only criticism of the taper is that, as Bill suggests, it is suppressive. That’s ok though, P’s main argument is that it is a healthier way of coming off of test. I did feel a little better coming off slowly, and while I am no expert on whether or not this is “healthier” I did like it better than cold turkey.

3

Yes, I didn’t say that a reasonable result might not be obtained, but as DB just said above, it is suppressive at that 100 mg/week level.

When simply going straight off of fast-acting steroids and using Clomid, and the testes having been kept in shape with HCG, and the cycle length not too long, T production generally snaps back very well and quickly on that protocol.

As to positive effect from doses like 80 mg/week, 60 mg/week, etc. this is pretty negligible.

Success from it seems to me sort of like crossing the bridge of a major highway on foot, and having done some very particular small gestures while walking and wearing some very particular clothing and so forth, and the bridge did not fall down. That is true. But it’s unknowable from that experience whether the bridge would also not have fallen down had the person instead, say, run as much distance till he was tired, then cruised the rest on walking, without these protection gestures.

If a person recovers their natural T with the described taper program, they will do so without the program as well. And recover it faster. Which means, to make it an equal comparison recovery wise and on total amount of steroids used, that an extra week (let’s say) using all the mg that was going to be used in the taper all in that week would be more productive. Because a dose such as 1000 mg/week for a week is going to do more than doses like 100 mg/week for 10 weeks in the context of a lifter who has already made good gains from steroids.

4

It’s good to have you back, Mr. Roberts. I hope you can stick around for a while.

I’d really like you to start a thread, or offer your opinions on the fall out of Operation Raw Deal.

5

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Yes, I didn’t say that a reasonable result might not be obtained, but as DB just said above, it is suppressive at that 100 mg/week level.

When simply going straight off of fast-acting steroids and using Clomid, and the testes having been kept in shape with HCG, and the cycle length not too long, T production generally snaps back very well and quickly on that protocol.

As to positive effect from doses like 80 mg/week, 60 mg/week, etc. this is pretty negligible.

Success from it seems to me sort of like crossing the bridge of a major highway on foot, and having done some very particular small gestures while walking and wearing some very particular clothing and so forth, and the bridge did not fall down. That is true. But it’s unknowable from that experience whether the bridge would also not have fallen down had the person instead, say, run as much distance till he was tired, then cruised the rest on walking, without these protection gestures.

If a person recovers their natural T with the described taper program, they will do so without the program as well. And recover it faster. Which means, to make it an equal comparison recovery wise and on total amount of steroids used, that an extra week (let’s say) using all the mg that was going to be used in the taper all in that week would be more productive. Because a dose such as 1000 mg/week for a week is going to do more than doses like 100 mg/week for 10 weeks in the context of a lifter who has already made good gains from steroids.[/quote]

If I am understanding this last portion correctly, you are saying that it would be more benificial to the lifter to have used the amount of steroid you were going to use during the taper and have implemented it into the actual cycle – gained the extra muscle that you would not have gained had you used a taper and potentially lose this new gained muscle during a typical PCT protocol, therefor coming out ahead of a taper, which you believe will lose muscle regardless.

This does make some sense, and I cannot disagree with the logic, but there are many variables at play here. The reason the taper makes more physiological sense to me, is the fact that your test levels are very high during the cycle. To avoid the “crash” of going from X amount to dwindling down based on half-life ester to eventually zero, and waiting for your HPTA to get back on track, it seems reasonable to think that implementing a slow decline of this process where blood levels are more stable while allowing the body to regain homeostasis is the better choice.

Now, with all of that being said…the only real way to tell would be clinical trial(which probably will never be done) or real world experience from vets who have tried both.

Craig

6

Thanks, Rainjack! I will do that. Don’t know how much use it will be as there have been other means published, but who knows.

Craig, yes, that’s basically it. To some extent I think users in general wind up easily coming to an incorrect conclusion from something that’s kind of deceptive, a somewhat tricky thing that happens. It’s possible though to very reproducibly show it happens and thus to account for it.

Namely, androgen use yields besides gains in muscle protein considerable added mass and muscle size from increased glycogen and water storage. It’s a pretty major effect. For example in me personally it’s 9 lb. For others it can be somewhat more or less.

In the case of fast-acting steroids this weight and size is seen to disappear quite rapidly, within a week, yet it’s obvious that the muscle itself is retained, just not all the glycogen and water. The glycogen and water likewise will come back within a week with fast acting steroids and sufficient dose.

With longer half life substances this reduction occurs over a longer time and is easily taken for being “real losses” rather than a reversible thing strictly having to do with whether there’s this much androgens in the system or not.

Anyway, provided as is generally the case with a moderate length cycle that clears rapidly and PCT, that T levels pretty promptly return to normal range, there isn’t a crash of actual muscle to be protected against.

7

[quote]rainjack wrote:
It’s good to have you back, Mr. Roberts. I hope you can stick around for a while.

[/quote]

Seriously! I don’t post here, I just read from time to time. . .

But I saw Bill Roberts had replied to a thread and I got all excited.

Stick around, we miss ya!

8

I intended to post in a few days about my own Test taper experience but here we go.

BTW the goal is NOT to recover quicker, it is to go about it as painlessly as possible, with no depression, libido issues, etc.

I did a shorter version. 3 weeks at 100mg and 3 at 80, 60, 40. Why? Because I was only doing 300mg of Test E and 300mg of EQ a week with Aromasin 0,2mg EOD - and because I thought I’d run out of gear (I didnt). Oh and to be honest I dont like to pin myself that much and wanted it over with. I used 27 slin pins for the taper.

Bottomline: it’s the best PCT I ever did! I’m two weeks away from my last shot, which means 8 weeks from my full on cyle, and my bodyweight is the same! For me, it’s really uncharted territory. I usually lose a lot post cycle. I’m a little softer, so I’d say I gained 2 pounds of fat and lost 2 of lean mass, but that is still pretty good compared to my past experiences.

I used Clomid during the 100mg weeks. It was evident I was getting back to “normal” at that dose with the Clomid. The boys are at full size, libido was good (though not as while on cyle, man I was horny!), and while I suddenly felt 15 years older, there’s no depression or whatnot. I only felt off cycle during the taper, and I feel the same now, even better, now that I’m totally off.

I had bad acne on the upper back and shoulders, something I never had before. I dont know if it was the clomid, or just that cold weather set in and the skin didnt get sun exposure anymore.

Anyways, to me it’s evident Prisoner’s test taper is a great contribution to the game and I thank him for it!

And I too am glad your back Bill!