I’ve recently spend some time on european steroid forums as I’m reading all I can before my first cyle. The amounts they recommend are at least 50% lower than here. These guys want the same thing: mass, strength with minimal side effects. They also talk about supplementing with ab. 100 mg of zinc daily (with Nolvadex ready) to combat water retention and gyno. What do you guys think?
I would be interested to see what kind of dosages they play with, how about you lay down a sample cycle for us? Also, as far as I know, zinc has no diruretic, or antiestrogenic action. These seem to me to be the only reason why zinc would be such must have supplement while on cycle. Off cycle of course it is know to maximize testosterone production, as it the key ingredient of ‘ZMA’. As for vitamen B6 - studies show it has some antiprogesteronic action, however I proved that this doesn’t make it effective as an ancillary when on more then a gram of durabolin per week :).
[quote]Prisoner#22 wrote:
As for vitamen B6 - studies show it has some antiprogesteronic action, however I proved that this doesn’t make it effective as an ancillary when on more then a gram of durabolin per week :).[/quote]
I’ve read that B6 works well to stave off progesterone induced gyno when on tren. I bought a bucket full of B6 the other day for that very reason. Am I pissing in the wind with the B6?
[quote]Prisoner#22 wrote:
I would be interested to see what kind of dosages they play with, how about you lay down a sample cycle for us? [/quote]
Simple first cycle europeans recommend is 12 weeks of 200mg test enatat with 400mg frontload + 150mg of zinc daily with Nolvadex on hand. They really swear by this zinc but it has to be zinc aspartate or zinc histidine for better absorption. Zinc use is preffered over Armidex to combat water retention because Armidex may cause side effects.
The guys I talked to know their stuff, they agree with most of what I’ve seen here on T-mag, the only difference is whats mentioned above.
I have read that bromocriptine is a good progestin antagonist. But winstrol is still the most proven.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Prisoner#22 wrote:
As for vitamen B6 - studies show it has some antiprogesteronic action, however I proved that this doesn’t make it effective as an ancillary when on more then a gram of durabolin per week :).
I’ve read that B6 works well to stave off progesterone induced gyno when on tren. I bought a bucket full of B6 the other day for that very reason. Am I pissing in the wind with the B6?
[/quote]
It’s always interesting to read something new to get a different perspective on things. However that cycle you mentioned would not do ANYTHING for a solid 99.9% of us here who have already used higher doses and stacked various gear. Looks more like hrt to me.
I will say that when I first started getting into this game I saw a few friends of mine do 10 weeks of sust at 250mg/every week and make some decent gains ie. 10-15 lbs then they’d lose about 5 lbs and to be honest NONE of them where training and eating right in the first place.
DO you have what type of diet/training these Europeans follow?
Yes bro, you are pretty much pissing in the wind. I read the research, and decided to give it a try and found out as usual that over the counter vitamins are no match as an ancillary vs. AAS. In addition to this I did use winstrol as well, and found it to be ineffective too. Bromocriptine is pretty much the only effective ancillary for progesteronic gyno that I know of.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Prisoner#22 wrote:
As for vitamen B6 - studies show it has some antiprogesteronic action, however I proved that this doesn’t make it effective as an ancillary when on more then a gram of durabolin per week :).
I’ve read that B6 works well to stave off progesterone induced gyno when on tren. I bought a bucket full of B6 the other day for that very reason. Am I pissing in the wind with the B6?
[/quote]
I believe the individuals who are doing these cycles are still within their ‘natural’ potential. Gaining 15 lbs while on, and keeping 10 would not be unreasonable. I remember years ago, when creatine first came out, gaining 10-15 lbs on creatine and keeping about 10, so it is now unrealistic to do the same while on just 200-250 mg of test per week. Pct would also be a lot easier in this cirmcumstance given the lower amount of aromatisation. But someone who was 40-50 lbs over their natural peak, this would do absolutely nothing for.
Yup
[quote]Wideguy wrote:
It’s always interesting to read something new to get a different perspective on things.However that cycle you mentioned would not do ANYTHING for a solid 99.9% of us here who have already used higher doses and stacked various gear. Looks more like hrt to me. DO you have what type of diet/training these Europeans follow? [/quote]
From what I’ve seen they follow the same diet recommendations we find here on t-mag, higher protein and carbs while on, it’s just looks like they want to minimize side effects when using. Maybe this is why that zinc supplementation works because the doses are not that high.
[quote]Prisoner#22 wrote:
I believe the individuals who are doing these cycles are still within their ‘natural’ potential. Gaining 15 lbs while on, and keeping 10 would not be unreasonable. I remember years ago, when creatine first came out, gaining 10-15 lbs on creatine and keeping about 10, so it is now unrealistic to do the same while on just 200-250 mg of test per week. Pct would also be a lot easier in this cirmcumstance given the lower amount of aromatisation. But someone who was 40-50 lbs over their natural peak, this would do absolutely nothing for.[/quote]
where do you figure you’ve reached natural peak v. just a plateau?
Wide, you’ve said you’re around 220, right?
Been training for 6 years or more, you’ve obviously–from your posts–been cycling on and off for some time now, how’d you decide?
I’m up to 230-235 right now. I’ve done 3 cycles now 1 bulker, 1 cutter, and a combo of both (that was my longest). Truthfully, when I started I was not at my genetic potential. My deciding factors were the amount of time I had researched it (about 4 years), my age ie. I had decided to wait till I was 23, the price/availability, and I new I had enough maturity to use gear responsibly.
Sometimes I kinda wish I’d waited another year or two but overall, no regrets.
astrofizyq wrote:
Zinc use is preffered over Arimidex to combat water retention because Arimidex may cause side effects.
Not to highjack the thread, but I PubMeded zinc and check around in several physiology and endocrinology books I have and zinc doesn’t seem to have any documented strong anti-estrogenic effects.
As far as arimidex, what sides are you talking about? I love my arimidex, it totally squashes estrogenic sides, without any noticable sides, except for increasing sex drive. I was also reading in several studies being performed right now that arimidex used in conjuntion with a DHT-inhibitor increses hair regrowth in some men.
Drop the zinc as a anti-estrogen, use your ZMA for the real intended purpose, testosterone support, not estrogen supression.
[quote]Clark Call wrote:
astrofizyq wrote:
Zinc use is preffered over Arimidex to combat water retention because Arimidex may cause side effects.
Not to highjack the thread, but I PubMeded zinc and check around in several physiology and endocrinology books I have and zinc doesn’t seem to have any documented strong anti-estrogenic effects.
As far as arimidex, what sides are you talking about? I love my arimidex, it totally squashes estrogenic sides, without any noticable sides, except for increasing sex drive. I was also reading in several studies being performed right now that arimidex used in conjuntion with a DHT-inhibitor increses hair regrowth in some men.
Drop the zinc as a anti-estrogen, use your ZMA for the real intended purpose, testosterone support, not estrogen supression.
[/quote]
Lipid levels can bottom out while using Arimidex, but using Nolva with it will help out.
[quote]Joe Weider wrote:
where do you figure you’ve reached natural peak v. just a plateau?
Wide, you’ve said you’re around 220, right?
Been training for 6 years or more, you’ve obviously–from your posts–been cycling on and off for some time now, how’d you decide?
[/quote]
Weight of course means really nothing to me as everybody has a different skeletal structure. Some people were born endomorphic or mesomorphic, and are naturally more thicker, then those born ectomorphic therefore they will weigh more, although They don’t always look bigger or better. I am one of the latter, I always had a light frame, so my maxxed ‘ripped’ weight was in the neigborhood of 185-190. After 3 years of training with very little results between the ages of 23 and almost 27 I did my first cycle. I am now about 220lbs ripped while on, and about 200 while off. There are very little gains left for me to attain using steroids alone other than detail work, The next step up undoubtedly is insulin and maybe growth, which at this point I am both not planning on.
To conclude, the way you figure if you have reached your ‘set point’ is if after a few years of tying every trick in the book, both exercise, and nutritionally speaking without noticable progress, You resort to steroids and on your first steroid cycle you exploid for almost 30lbs of growth, It is pretty safe to say that the only thing holding you back was your natural test production.
do they have and short 3-4 week cycle examples? thanks