Thanks, Bill!
Bill,
I’ve got a couple of questions on Mag10 Legacy that I’d like to ask you–First the recovery rates–You say that response to LH at 2 weeks in is higher than normal while on, so recovery is accelerated–is this a universal across all known AAS/prohormones? Are there some compounds so suppressive that they just nix LH response right away? Also, aren’t there other primary factors affecting recovery?
Second, how did you come across this bit of information–[quote]In a 2-week cycle there’s a really positive effect that strength gains tend to build, at least with proper training, right through week 3… in other words, the end of the first “off” week has one stronger, though lighter, than at the end of the second “on” week."[/quote] This is the first time I’ve ever heard this, is this info gleaned from experience or is it scientifically/literature based?
See, I’ve got enough Mag10 Legacy in my freezer to do a 3 week 2x dose cycle sometime down the road this year. I was thinking of doing it 1x, 2x, 2x, 1x, off to make the cycle last 4 weeks. The last cycle was extremely productive strength wise. My training is geared solely towards max strength, and will probably be extremely high frequency (10x week+, as it was last time). All I care about are my numbers. You would still do 2 on 2 off?
quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
I can’t tell you from MAG-10 specifically, but generally when comparing steroid cycles with the same total dosages over time, at the 8 week point results will be somewhat better from 2 on / 2 off /2 on / 2 off than from 4 on / 4 off.
Probably two reasons explain this:
- In a 2-week cycle there’s a really positive effect that strength gains tend to build, at least with proper training, right through week 3… in other words, the end of the first “off” week has one stronger, though lighter, than at the end of the second “on” week.
So your body gets this effect twice, and has the strength increase occur before the second phase of this program, thus benefitting it.
- At the 8 week point you’ll have been off for four weeks with the 4 on / 4 off cycle, whereas doing two 2 on / 2 off cycles, you’ve been off only two weeks.
The more important reason I would guess is the consolidation effect in the off weeks between the two week cycles gives the body overall say at least 6 weeks to be gaining strength – the “on” weeks plus the first of each two “off” weeks – whereas with the 4 week cycle, probably only 5 weeks for strength increase; and additionally with the 2-week cycles by having the little break period, the body is ready to gain faster than in the 4-week case where gains have already been occurring for say 3 weeks. So it’s two periods of the same total time but faster rate.
Another reason is that recovery is about immediate with the 2 on / 2 off program so the only “losses” are of glycogen and water in the muscles, I think, whereas with longer cycles, even a mere 4 weeks, there tends to be some actual loss of muscle protein mass I think. Not gigantic especially with only a 4 week cycle, but not zero either.
As to why recovery rate is different, a reason is that at the 2-week point of exposure to high androgen, the sensitivity of the hypothalamus to LH-releasing-hormone from the pituitary is even higher than baseline, so LH production is very good immediately; whereas past the 2-week point LHRH responsiveness goes far below baseline, from the scientific research; and takes some time to recover. So LH production is not immediately good upon the end of cycles longer than 2 weeks. Thus, more tendency to actual losses.
I don’t think MAG-10 would differ from everything else in how cycling works in these regards.[/quote]
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
Bill,
I’ve got a couple of questions on Mag10 Legacy that I’d like to ask you–First the recovery rates–You say that response to LH at 2 weeks in is higher than normal while on, so recovery is accelerated–is this a universal across all known AAS/prohormones? [/quote]
So far as I know, yes. The specific study that showed this didn’t try to cover the spectrum but in terms of putting this to practice, so far as I know an exception has never been seen.
I don’t think so.
Yes, estrogens are inhibitory too. But if using short-acting compounds, in the context of a 2-week cycle this doesn’t seem to make recovery harder or significantly harder, or at least not when using Clomid at the same time. (Not sure when it isn’t.) MAG-10 has no conversion to estrogen.
As a hypothesis, this whole phenomenon may well be related to the female menstrual cycle. While not female, we have the same hypothalamus and the same pituitary at least basically. To have a cyclical rhythm like that requires a positive feedback stage. So in other words, for women to have their menstrual cycles it’s necessary that there be a phase where instead of inhibition, there’s actually self-promotion.
Since that includes – in fact principally includes – estrogen, it probably works the same way with regard to responsiveness, though I haven’t seen specific data on that.
Of course, that’s only a possible idea, but doesn’t seem a nonsensical reason and mechanism.
Experience both of myself and many others.
Yes. Or alternately, more off depending on what the schedule is. E.g., if there’s quite a bit of fat to be lost and time isn’t lacking, it would probably be more efficient to gain for 2 weeks while on, have a week at maintenance calories, and then two more dieting; rather than perhaps simply not having sufficient time for the dieting if doing 2 on / 2 off for the same total number of weeks on. So it does depend on the case.
(Of course, if the number of weeks on can be increased, then the 2 on / 2 off is faster.)
Bill, thanks very much for the reply.
One more thing, if you don’t mind…
What’s the active life/half life of MAG-10? I was under the impression it was a short-lived compound due to the every day dosing.
Also, I’m aware of the role estrogens play in recovery. Thanks for the comments though. I don’t delve too much into the AAS/prohormone side of things. My area of chemistry is more biophysical, but I’m interested in learning more about endocrinology/steroids/hormones because I’ve been considering working in performance fields as strength trainer, or for a company. Any reading suggestions?
Not too much fat to lose in the cycle, but I really don’t care about bodyfat, only my max lifts/squat/bench/dead. I’m now wondering if I could eek out more gains in my lifts if I only single dosed my Mag10 cycles and did 3 sets of 2 on/2 off.
Thanks again
The half-life wasn’t measured.
However, it’s something pretty predictable. As you know, injectable steroid esters have half-lives depending almost entirely on the ester length – actually it’s based on the partition coefficient of the molecule but the ester length is the main differing factor.
The MAG-10 components were ethylcarbonate esters which are largely absorbed intact. In terms of partition coefficient, this is somewhere between acetate and propionate esters.
Thus, a half-life of at least a day but probably under two days, ignoring differences in ester hydrolysis rate between alkanoate esters (such as acetate or propionate) and carbonate esters, which are slower. So that would in theory add to it somewhat, but in practice I don’t think the half-life was substantially more than one day.
In terms of performance, those using it 1x/day daily got better results than are seen with 1x/daily short-acting orals: also the same phenomenon was seen as with injectables that if no frontloading was done then results were considerably slower in coming – hence the recommendation to double dose on the first day.
(To promptly get what will be the intended steady state levels with a compound with a half life of X days, it’s necessary to take X + 1 doses, as a general thing. So if a 1-day half-life, double-dose.)
In terms of reading material, hmm, hard question. By far the most valuable book is Kochakian’s book written in 1976, of which the title at least starts with “Anabolic androgenic steroids” and published as Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology volume 43. Besides this the best thing to do is to use Medline using keywords that seem good and reading thousands of abstracts, and picking some articles that seem worthwhile. Time-consuming but really the only way to cover the bases. I also have some articles on the Mesomorphosis site that could be useful.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Oh, and I missed where you asked what dose, with regard to Clomid: 50 mg/day except for day 1 which is loaded up with six 50 mg tabs.
Reason being is that if this is not done, but only one tab is taken per day, it takes weeks to get to the correct level, whereas this gets you there immediately.[/quote]
Would the 6 tabs be spread throughout the day? One every few hours. Thanks, Bill!
It may not matter (absorption might be as good all at once) but that’s the way I do it.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
It may not matter (absorption might be as good all at once) but that’s the way I do it.[/quote]
Ok. Thanks.