Again my real life EQ experience contradicts the “internet bad boys of anabolics”. The current internet wisdom re" EQ says 500mg/wk and it takes 1500mg before you even begin to feel the effects. < That is very wrong. I, w/in 3 days post injection, got a fair amount of insomnia and a significant increase in well being from “only” 100mg. I realize this is NOT normal but it does clearly demonstrate that as usual internet protocol is WRONG. I am now firmly convinced that re: EQ you do not need 500mg/wk, and if you don’t get a response from a modest dosage the odds are you probably need to take 3-6 months off & clean your receptors out. Or you could piss alot of money away “just like the pros do” and FYI alot of the “pros” are broke losers who live off skank chicks or old gay men.
Bushy, you are delightfully salty recently. I love it!
[quote]bushidobadboy wrote:
Well you seem to have all the answers and a dumb attitude to go with it.
You should go far, but why do you keep asking questions to which you already think you know the best response.
Also, why do you keep putting down others who are better than you at what you do.
You reek of insecurity and misinformation as well as an unpleasantly judgmental attitude.
For that reason I shall do my very best to avoid any thread started by you.
Good day.
Bushy[/quote]
Man, I hope everyone in Belgium isn’t this damn stupid.
EQ is a mediocre at best vet drug. Take your euros and buy some good shit.
Its so funny when u find out how “internet losers” really look like DESPITE they’re pharmaceutical expertise. They aren’t IFBB members, they rarely compete in physique contests/PL’ing yet they have more “medical” knowledge than a freakin PDR.
Bring on the pics you mass monsters!
[quote]Radjxf wrote:
Man, I hope everyone in Belgium isn’t this damn stupid.
EQ is a mediocre at best vet drug. Take your euros and buy some good shit.[/quote]
Dude NO drug was EVER designed for animal use. Equipoise was named after (3rd post re: this) a theoretical equal balance of hormones. Each drug as good qualities, strength & weaknesses. EQ is a little more androgenic than Deca. Deca is a little more anabolic. Boldenone Undecyclenate was designed to be a none liver toxic injectable version of Dianabol. < That is one helluva goal. I personally think it is all around THE best anabolic there is. When you weigh sides, gains, % of kept gains, toxicity, est. conversion, etc. < Bold. comes out on top to me. Deca is close second though…VERY close.
I really give a shit less what you or any other “5gr/wk -pro wannabe” thinks or says.
[quote]FortDodge wrote:
Its so funny when u find out how “internet losers” really look like DESPITE they’re pharmaceutical expertise. They aren’t IFBB members, they rarely compete in physique contests/PL’ing yet they have more “medical” knowledge than a freakin PDR.
Bring on the pics you mass monsters!
[/quote]
You first.
I’m not the one basically saying “I use pro-level dosages”. I’m not the one professing Registered Pharmacist level knowledge of anabolics. I am on the one saying regardless of your anabolic use if you don’t have the genetics to become a professional bodybuilder it ain’t gonna happen. Reality hurts some people, esp. those who beleive an IFBB card is just one more 30gram cycle a way.
OK, enough bickering here. I think the premise of the original post is a good one. That is, the dosage of equipoise that is commonly espoused on Internet is far to high. After that the thread went down hill. I’m a bit older than the average user, mid forties. I did AAS for some years in my late 20s and into my early thirties. I’ve been in gyms most of my life and have known many many AAS over the years. I can tell you all that the tendency is for most average users to administer higher and higher dosages over time. There is complex psychology involved in this behavior. Most people (99.98%)will never ever ever reach or approach the physique level of a professional bodybuilder. Most of this is related to genetics. I have seen individuals with great genetics and they can grow and remain lean on a relatively poor diet and not-so-great life style. Yet, the average bodybuilder with average genetics, training, good diet and life style attains a good physique but will never place in a regional level bodybuilding contest. This is the reality. The difference is not the amount of drugs used.
So the psychology works in the following way: the average bodybuilder that has begun to experiment with AAS sees his original gain of 25 lbs and assumes that these compounds can “take him all the way” or at least give him the look. He sees internet posts or hears rumor of the drug regimen of some pros, real or faked, and begins to assume his stilted progress, after his original gain, and despite use of AAS, is the lower dosages he is using compared to “the pros”. He increases the dose. A few more pounds are realized. The dose goes up even more. The physique does not continue to progress and the physiology begins to break down. Time off of the drugs leads to large losses in muscle gains and thee is also large swings in self image and mental well being. As the drug levels increase so do the deleterious affects that manifest after cycle. Soon the user contemplates, and maybe decides to, never go off and just cruise. Essentially, the user has become completely dependant on the drugs and now must use large dosagers to retain gains.
So it is not surprising to see dosages espoused that are quite high. Effective doses are surprisingly low. These things should be thought of as the paint and polish on the car not the engine and transmission.
Good post, pickapeck.
Indeed, well articulated. I would argue that gear is more of a turbo charger for one’s engine than a flashy paint job. But your point remains basically the same and well received. At some point everyone needs to either keep increasing the dosage indefinitely or settle on a level they are comfortable with for their body. I know for me about 1.25-1.5g of gear is about as far as I like to go these days. Sure that might be more than double what a rookie takes but we all settle in somewhere. I would dare to assert I’m well past rookie status and further assert I doubt I could make the kind of progress I’m looking for on say “just” 400mg a week of Test and only Test. Yet it could be argued that 400mg a week is an effective dosage; for some. No doubt a few others out there have settled on baseline doses even higher than mine. Others even lower. We all know our own bodies best.
Thanks for the compliments you guys. I’ve sort of settled in on total dosages under 1000 mg/week. This is probably not as healthy as I would like to believe. I’ve just started 500 test and 300 mast.
Gotta use what works for ya. There is not necessarily a right way with gear but there definitely is a wrong way.
[quote]FortDodge wrote:
I’m not the one basically saying “I use pro-level dosages”. I’m not the one professing Registered Pharmacist level knowledge of anabolics. I am on the one saying regardless of your anabolic use if you don’t have the genetics to become a professional bodybuilder it ain’t gonna happen. Reality hurts some people, esp. those who beleive an IFBB card is just one more 30gram cycle a way. [/quote]
I think you are just slaying windmills here. Please list the people in this forum who think that they are just 30 pounds from their pro card.
Since when has EQ been the topic of the community? I must have missed the memo.
[quote]sapasion wrote:
Indeed, well articulated. I would argue that gear is more of a turbo charger for one’s engine than a flashy paint job. But your point remains basically the same and well received. At some point everyone needs to either keep increasing the dosage indefinitely or settle on a level they are comfortable with for their body. I know for me about 1.25-1.5g of gear is about as far as I like to go these days. Sure that might be more than double what a rookie takes but we all settle in somewhere. I would dare to assert I’m well past rookie status and further assert I doubt I could make the kind of progress I’m looking for on say “just” 400mg a week of Test and only Test. Yet it could be argued that 400mg a week is an effective dosage; for some. No doubt a few others out there have settled on baseline doses even higher than mine. Others even lower. We all know our own bodies best. [/quote]
I have taken up to 1.6g total gear per week before, and I notice no real difference between that dosage and 600mg total.
I have friends that are squarely in the “more is better” camp, but to look at them, you can tell that it is a psychological addiction, and not a search for progress.
My body has sent me the message that 235 is about the upper limit where it is willing to go - I had a goal of 250. However, gear or not - I start to feel like shit and fall apart at 240.
I doubt I will ever go over 1g total per week again.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
sapasion wrote:
Indeed, well articulated. I would argue that gear is more of a turbo charger for one’s engine than a flashy paint job. But your point remains basically the same and well received. At some point everyone needs to either keep increasing the dosage indefinitely or settle on a level they are comfortable with for their body. I know for me about 1.25-1.5g of gear is about as far as I like to go these days. Sure that might be more than double what a rookie takes but we all settle in somewhere. I would dare to assert I’m well past rookie status and further assert I doubt I could make the kind of progress I’m looking for on say “just” 400mg a week of Test and only Test. Yet it could be argued that 400mg a week is an effective dosage; for some. No doubt a few others out there have settled on baseline doses even higher than mine. Others even lower. We all know our own bodies best.
I have taken up to 1.6g total gear per week before, and I notice no real difference between that dosage and 600mg total.
I have friends that are squarely in the “more is better” camp, but to look at them, you can tell that it is a psychological addiction, and not a search for progress.
My body has sent me the message that 235 is about the upper limit where it is willing to go - I had a goal of 250. However, gear or not - I start to feel like shit and fall apart at 240.
I doubt I will ever go over 1g total per week again. [/quote]
Probably smart.
You know one thing I can’t grasp re: EQ is it (as posted earlier) was originally designed to be an injectable form of Dbol. That plan is largely beleived to have failed but I have to disagree w/ that conclusion. If the goal is sheer weight regardless of its content (eg. fat, muscle or water, etc.) then of course EQ can’t equal Dbol. But if lbm gains are the goal (of course) then EQ IMO did acheive the original goal. I realize this is gonna draw flames (and that isn’t this posts point).
I re-read alot of my earlier posts and I freely admit I may have wrong re: Dbol as it eventually caused my elevated liver values and liver pain. In short, I no longer use dbol & I would advise those who are to reevalate your goals and quickly discontinue its use before perm. damage is done. < Just some friendly advice not some hypocritical BS.
With all due respect, I must respond in counterpoint. Now in no way I am going to discount your personal experience, however, for accuracy’s sake my own personal experience must also be heard. The masses can then decide what to do.
Over the past few years I have ingested several grams of dbol. Right now I have better liver values than I did five years ago pre-dbol or any gear. Now admittedly, I have used and am a proponet of using liver aids like liv.52 but having said that I have long asserted that too much is made of 17AA orals destroying our livers. Since initially being diagnosed with high cholestrol I do get regular bloodwork, regardless of being on or off. In 2006, I had my values checked about six weeks before a cycle. That cycle was deca/cyp with a dbol kickstart of 50mg ED for four weeks.
A month or two after the cycle my liver values had again improved. Now I realize this is less than scientific since there were gaps of multiple weeks. But again I insist that too much negativity is placed at the feet of 17AA’s as being liver killers. Either that or products like liver longer and liv.52 really are wonder products. I never ever have had liver pain. Anytime I use dbol now I save the liv.52 and what-not for after I stop dbol anyway.
Again, not trying to discount yours or anyone’s experience just saying there are two sides of this coin.
Well bro I gotta respectfully but strongly disagree w/ you. I’ve even heard of some dumb kid using dbol non stop for 2 yrs then dieing of liver failure. Again, not trying to be a jerk but I suspect that you are way in the minority and/or your dbol was drastilly underdosed, which is def possible since NO legit pharm corp. makes dbol anymore - its UGL only. Since your tranferase values must alos be OK I guess w/ you its a non-issue but there is overwhelming journal evidence that C-17 alpha alkyllation most certainly stresses your liver since the drug can survive numerous passes through.
Glad to hear your healthy but I’d seriously consider what doctors did a good while ago and develop a form of dbol which wasn’t C-17 which all EQ really is. Dbol w/out the liver stress. Another plus is 1 injection per week is plenty and to contradict even more 100mg/wk is plenty in most cases.