steroids really aren’t all that addictive.
I’ve done a couple of low dose cycles. They were fun. Will probably do another one in the future but not anytime soon.
The idea that once you’ve had a taste of the juice you automatically become some snarling vascular beast with no balls who never comes off is every bit as retarded as saying having a couple of pints every now and then will automatically lead to alcoholism.
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
steroids really aren’t all that addictive.
I’ve done a couple of low dose cycles. They were fun. Will probably do another one in the future but not anytime soon.
The idea that once you’ve had a taste of the juice you automatically become some snarling vascular beast with no balls who never comes off is every bit as retarded as saying having a couple of pints every now and then will automatically lead to alcoholism.[/quote]
True, i know some people who’ve absolutely loved it but after doing one or two cycles, have never gone on again.
Right the stereotype about stoners is completely correct whereas all stereotypes about bodybuilders are completely wrong.
[quote]audiogarden1 wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Remember that one time I said that a good intelligent discussion was happening in here?
I was wrong.[/quote]
Remember that one time that a thread on T-Nation went this long and still contained a good, intelligent discussion?
Neither do i. [/quote]
True
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
steroids really aren’t all that addictive.
I’ve done a couple of low dose cycles. They were fun. Will probably do another one in the future but not anytime soon.
The idea that once you’ve had a taste of the juice you automatically become some snarling vascular beast with no balls who never comes off is every bit as retarded as saying having a couple of pints every now and then will automatically lead to alcoholism.[/quote]
Did you keep most of your gainz? Since you aren’t close to your natty potential, cycling a few times would bring you closer to that and allow you to keep it. Is my reasoning sound at all?
[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
steroids really aren’t all that addictive.
I’ve done a couple of low dose cycles. They were fun. Will probably do another one in the future but not anytime soon.
The idea that once you’ve had a taste of the juice you automatically become some snarling vascular beast with no balls who never comes off is every bit as retarded as saying having a couple of pints every now and then will automatically lead to alcoholism.[/quote]
Did you keep most of your gainz? Since you aren’t close to your natty potential, cycling a few times would bring you closer to that and allow you to keep it. Is my reasoning sound at all? [/quote]
I know exactly what you mean mate.
Yeah I did keep my gains. 100% of the strength, and only lost a few lbs of bodyweight (which I suspect was water).
My first cycle I went from 180lbs (omg so skinny) to about 188, with a 20k increase on my bench. Could’ve probably got a few more lbs out of it but I really fucked my back up just before starting so my leg training was pretty limited. Second cycle took me up to 195 but I recomped pretty significantly so the weight gain doesn’t tell the full story. 2nd cycle was a tiny bit disappointing tbh, I expected more in the way of gains but I found out after that a lot of people who used the lab I’d used weren’t happy with their recent cycles and the general consensus is the lab has gone to shit. So it goes.
It’s been close to 6 months since my last cycle, and I am gaining naturally just the same as anybody else, with no sign of the gains I made on cycle going anywhere. It actually seems like I gain a little faster since the cycles. I’ve heard that steroids can permanently upregulate your androgen receptors, but I don’t know if it really happens to any significant degree, or if the low dosed cycles I ran would have that effect.
Obviously if I had been running 5g of gear and gone way over my genetic potential I would expect to lose something, but in my opinion (which is mirrored by my experience) if you are below your genetic potential running moderate doses you can absolutely keep your gains.
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
steroids really aren’t all that addictive.
I’ve done a couple of low dose cycles. They were fun. Will probably do another one in the future but not anytime soon.
The idea that once you’ve had a taste of the juice you automatically become some snarling vascular beast with no balls who never comes off is every bit as retarded as saying having a couple of pints every now and then will automatically lead to alcoholism.[/quote]
Did you keep most of your gainz? Since you aren’t close to your natty potential, cycling a few times would bring you closer to that and allow you to keep it. Is my reasoning sound at all? [/quote]
I know exactly what you mean mate.
Yeah I did keep my gains. 100% of the strength, and only lost a few lbs of bodyweight (which I suspect was water).
My first cycle I went from 180lbs (omg so skinny) to about 188, with a 20k increase on my bench. Could’ve probably got a few more lbs out of it but I really fucked my back up just before starting so my leg training was pretty limited. Second cycle took me up to 195 but I recomped pretty significantly so the weight gain doesn’t tell the full story. 2nd cycle was a tiny bit disappointing tbh, I expected more in the way of gains but I found out after that a lot of people who used the lab I’d used weren’t happy with their recent cycles and the general consensus is the lab has gone to shit. So it goes.
It’s been close to 6 months since my last cycle, and I am gaining naturally just the same as anybody else, with no sign of the gains I made on cycle going anywhere. It actually seems like I gain a little faster since the cycles. I’ve heard that steroids can permanently upregulate your androgen receptors, but I don’t know if it really happens to any significant degree, or if the low dosed cycles I ran would have that effect.
Obviously if I had been running 5g of gear and gone way over my genetic potential I would expect to lose something, but in my opinion (which is mirrored by my experience) if you are below your genetic potential running moderate doses you can absolutely keep your gains.[/quote]
Right on. I’m curious to see what Walk thinks about the androgen receptors. It seems like you could “fire up” more receptors since they are a lot more active on cycle. Again, I’m just making shit up and speculating.
I also wonder if you could kick your natural T levels a little higher with a good, low dose cycle and solid PCT.
[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
steroids really aren’t all that addictive.
I’ve done a couple of low dose cycles. They were fun. Will probably do another one in the future but not anytime soon.
The idea that once you’ve had a taste of the juice you automatically become some snarling vascular beast with no balls who never comes off is every bit as retarded as saying having a couple of pints every now and then will automatically lead to alcoholism.[/quote]
Did you keep most of your gainz? Since you aren’t close to your natty potential, cycling a few times would bring you closer to that and allow you to keep it. Is my reasoning sound at all? [/quote]
I know exactly what you mean mate.
Yeah I did keep my gains. 100% of the strength, and only lost a few lbs of bodyweight (which I suspect was water).
My first cycle I went from 180lbs (omg so skinny) to about 188, with a 20k increase on my bench. Could’ve probably got a few more lbs out of it but I really fucked my back up just before starting so my leg training was pretty limited. Second cycle took me up to 195 but I recomped pretty significantly so the weight gain doesn’t tell the full story. 2nd cycle was a tiny bit disappointing tbh, I expected more in the way of gains but I found out after that a lot of people who used the lab I’d used weren’t happy with their recent cycles and the general consensus is the lab has gone to shit. So it goes.
It’s been close to 6 months since my last cycle, and I am gaining naturally just the same as anybody else, with no sign of the gains I made on cycle going anywhere. It actually seems like I gain a little faster since the cycles. I’ve heard that steroids can permanently upregulate your androgen receptors, but I don’t know if it really happens to any significant degree, or if the low dosed cycles I ran would have that effect.
Obviously if I had been running 5g of gear and gone way over my genetic potential I would expect to lose something, but in my opinion (which is mirrored by my experience) if you are below your genetic potential running moderate doses you can absolutely keep your gains.[/quote]
Right on. I’m curious to see what Walk thinks about the androgen receptors. It seems like you could “fire up” more receptors since they are a lot more active on cycle. Again, I’m just making shit up and speculating.
I also wonder if you could kick your natural T levels a little higher with a good, low dose cycle and solid PCT. [/quote]
Low dose is a waste of time IMO. Eight pounds for a first cycle is pretty low, unless it was only four weeks long.
[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
steroids really aren’t all that addictive.
I’ve done a couple of low dose cycles. They were fun. Will probably do another one in the future but not anytime soon.
The idea that once you’ve had a taste of the juice you automatically become some snarling vascular beast with no balls who never comes off is every bit as retarded as saying having a couple of pints every now and then will automatically lead to alcoholism.[/quote]
Did you keep most of your gainz? Since you aren’t close to your natty potential, cycling a few times would bring you closer to that and allow you to keep it. Is my reasoning sound at all? [/quote]
I know exactly what you mean mate.
Yeah I did keep my gains. 100% of the strength, and only lost a few lbs of bodyweight (which I suspect was water).
My first cycle I went from 180lbs (omg so skinny) to about 188, with a 20k increase on my bench. Could’ve probably got a few more lbs out of it but I really fucked my back up just before starting so my leg training was pretty limited. Second cycle took me up to 195 but I recomped pretty significantly so the weight gain doesn’t tell the full story. 2nd cycle was a tiny bit disappointing tbh, I expected more in the way of gains but I found out after that a lot of people who used the lab I’d used weren’t happy with their recent cycles and the general consensus is the lab has gone to shit. So it goes.
It’s been close to 6 months since my last cycle, and I am gaining naturally just the same as anybody else, with no sign of the gains I made on cycle going anywhere. It actually seems like I gain a little faster since the cycles. I’ve heard that steroids can permanently upregulate your androgen receptors, but I don’t know if it really happens to any significant degree, or if the low dosed cycles I ran would have that effect.
Obviously if I had been running 5g of gear and gone way over my genetic potential I would expect to lose something, but in my opinion (which is mirrored by my experience) if you are below your genetic potential running moderate doses you can absolutely keep your gains.[/quote]
Right on. I’m curious to see what Walk thinks about the androgen receptors. It seems like you could “fire up” more receptors since they are a lot more active on cycle. Again, I’m just making shit up and speculating.
I also wonder if you could kick your natural T levels a little higher with a good, low dose cycle and solid PCT. [/quote]
the presence of adrogens has been observed to upregulate androgen receptors… but permanently? im not sure about that
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
steroids really aren’t all that addictive.
I’ve done a couple of low dose cycles. They were fun. Will probably do another one in the future but not anytime soon.
The idea that once you’ve had a taste of the juice you automatically become some snarling vascular beast with no balls who never comes off is every bit as retarded as saying having a couple of pints every now and then will automatically lead to alcoholism.[/quote]
Did you keep most of your gainz? Since you aren’t close to your natty potential, cycling a few times would bring you closer to that and allow you to keep it. Is my reasoning sound at all? [/quote]
I know exactly what you mean mate.
Yeah I did keep my gains. 100% of the strength, and only lost a few lbs of bodyweight (which I suspect was water).
My first cycle I went from 180lbs (omg so skinny) to about 188, with a 20k increase on my bench. Could’ve probably got a few more lbs out of it but I really fucked my back up just before starting so my leg training was pretty limited. Second cycle took me up to 195 but I recomped pretty significantly so the weight gain doesn’t tell the full story. 2nd cycle was a tiny bit disappointing tbh, I expected more in the way of gains but I found out after that a lot of people who used the lab I’d used weren’t happy with their recent cycles and the general consensus is the lab has gone to shit. So it goes.
It’s been close to 6 months since my last cycle, and I am gaining naturally just the same as anybody else, with no sign of the gains I made on cycle going anywhere. It actually seems like I gain a little faster since the cycles. I’ve heard that steroids can permanently upregulate your androgen receptors, but I don’t know if it really happens to any significant degree, or if the low dosed cycles I ran would have that effect.
Obviously if I had been running 5g of gear and gone way over my genetic potential I would expect to lose something, but in my opinion (which is mirrored by my experience) if you are below your genetic potential running moderate doses you can absolutely keep your gains.[/quote]
Right on. I’m curious to see what Walk thinks about the androgen receptors. It seems like you could “fire up” more receptors since they are a lot more active on cycle. Again, I’m just making shit up and speculating.
I also wonder if you could kick your natural T levels a little higher with a good, low dose cycle and solid PCT. [/quote]
Low dose is a waste of time IMO. Eight pounds for a first cycle is pretty low, unless it was only four weeks long.
[/quote]
Lol 8 solid lbs is great for a cycle. Go look at a 10lb roast that will give you an idea of wow much solid mass that is. Most bloat up 15-20lbs then lose 10+ lbs. so net gain of 5-10 mass after water. Two cycles like that a year and you’ll be a hulk.
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
steroids really aren’t all that addictive.
I’ve done a couple of low dose cycles. They were fun. Will probably do another one in the future but not anytime soon.
The idea that once you’ve had a taste of the juice you automatically become some snarling vascular beast with no balls who never comes off is every bit as retarded as saying having a couple of pints every now and then will automatically lead to alcoholism.[/quote]
Did you keep most of your gainz? Since you aren’t close to your natty potential, cycling a few times would bring you closer to that and allow you to keep it. Is my reasoning sound at all? [/quote]
I know exactly what you mean mate.
Yeah I did keep my gains. 100% of the strength, and only lost a few lbs of bodyweight (which I suspect was water).
My first cycle I went from 180lbs (omg so skinny) to about 188, with a 20k increase on my bench. Could’ve probably got a few more lbs out of it but I really fucked my back up just before starting so my leg training was pretty limited. Second cycle took me up to 195 but I recomped pretty significantly so the weight gain doesn’t tell the full story. 2nd cycle was a tiny bit disappointing tbh, I expected more in the way of gains but I found out after that a lot of people who used the lab I’d used weren’t happy with their recent cycles and the general consensus is the lab has gone to shit. So it goes.
It’s been close to 6 months since my last cycle, and I am gaining naturally just the same as anybody else, with no sign of the gains I made on cycle going anywhere. It actually seems like I gain a little faster since the cycles. I’ve heard that steroids can permanently upregulate your androgen receptors, but I don’t know if it really happens to any significant degree, or if the low dosed cycles I ran would have that effect.
Obviously if I had been running 5g of gear and gone way over my genetic potential I would expect to lose something, but in my opinion (which is mirrored by my experience) if you are below your genetic potential running moderate doses you can absolutely keep your gains.[/quote]
Right on. I’m curious to see what Walk thinks about the androgen receptors. It seems like you could “fire up” more receptors since they are a lot more active on cycle. Again, I’m just making shit up and speculating.
I also wonder if you could kick your natural T levels a little higher with a good, low dose cycle and solid PCT. [/quote]
Low dose is a waste of time IMO. Eight pounds for a first cycle is pretty low, unless it was only four weeks long.
[/quote]
Lol 8 solid lbs is great for a cycle. Go look at a 10lb roast that will give you an idea of wow much solid mass that is. Most bloat up 15-20lbs then lose 10+ lbs. so net gain of 5-10 mass after water. Two cycles like that a year and you’ll be a hulk. [/quote]
sub q water retention, intramuscular water retention, supraphysiological levels of glycogen storage…
yeah… them “solid pounds”
[quote]Mr. Walkway wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
steroids really aren’t all that addictive.
I’ve done a couple of low dose cycles. They were fun. Will probably do another one in the future but not anytime soon.
The idea that once you’ve had a taste of the juice you automatically become some snarling vascular beast with no balls who never comes off is every bit as retarded as saying having a couple of pints every now and then will automatically lead to alcoholism.[/quote]
Did you keep most of your gainz? Since you aren’t close to your natty potential, cycling a few times would bring you closer to that and allow you to keep it. Is my reasoning sound at all? [/quote]
I know exactly what you mean mate.
Yeah I did keep my gains. 100% of the strength, and only lost a few lbs of bodyweight (which I suspect was water).
My first cycle I went from 180lbs (omg so skinny) to about 188, with a 20k increase on my bench. Could’ve probably got a few more lbs out of it but I really fucked my back up just before starting so my leg training was pretty limited. Second cycle took me up to 195 but I recomped pretty significantly so the weight gain doesn’t tell the full story. 2nd cycle was a tiny bit disappointing tbh, I expected more in the way of gains but I found out after that a lot of people who used the lab I’d used weren’t happy with their recent cycles and the general consensus is the lab has gone to shit. So it goes.
It’s been close to 6 months since my last cycle, and I am gaining naturally just the same as anybody else, with no sign of the gains I made on cycle going anywhere. It actually seems like I gain a little faster since the cycles. I’ve heard that steroids can permanently upregulate your androgen receptors, but I don’t know if it really happens to any significant degree, or if the low dosed cycles I ran would have that effect.
Obviously if I had been running 5g of gear and gone way over my genetic potential I would expect to lose something, but in my opinion (which is mirrored by my experience) if you are below your genetic potential running moderate doses you can absolutely keep your gains.[/quote]
Right on. I’m curious to see what Walk thinks about the androgen receptors. It seems like you could “fire up” more receptors since they are a lot more active on cycle. Again, I’m just making shit up and speculating.
I also wonder if you could kick your natural T levels a little higher with a good, low dose cycle and solid PCT. [/quote]
Low dose is a waste of time IMO. Eight pounds for a first cycle is pretty low, unless it was only four weeks long.
[/quote]
Lol 8 solid lbs is great for a cycle. Go look at a 10lb roast that will give you an idea of wow much solid mass that is. Most bloat up 15-20lbs then lose 10+ lbs. so net gain of 5-10 mass after water. Two cycles like that a year and you’ll be a hulk. [/quote]
sub q water retention, intramuscular water retention, supraphysiological levels of glycogen storage…
yeah… them “solid pounds”[/quote]
Lol exactly. I am not talking the 20lbs of extra water you can gain in a couple weeks. Just look puffed up but no extra muscle if you have a decent eye you can see it. But if course ppl see omg I gained 30lbs on my first cycle. I always get a giggle
Remember when Shaun Assael dropped that bombshell of a book Steroid Nation? It completely changed the dichotomy of the steroid conversation because it put on paper what was already out there as widespread knowledge – America loves steroids.
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
steroids really aren’t all that addictive.
I’ve done a couple of low dose cycles. They were fun. Will probably do another one in the future but not anytime soon.
The idea that once you’ve had a taste of the juice you automatically become some snarling vascular beast with no balls who never comes off is every bit as retarded as saying having a couple of pints every now and then will automatically lead to alcoholism.[/quote]
Did you keep most of your gainz? Since you aren’t close to your natty potential, cycling a few times would bring you closer to that and allow you to keep it. Is my reasoning sound at all? [/quote]
I know exactly what you mean mate.
Yeah I did keep my gains. 100% of the strength, and only lost a few lbs of bodyweight (which I suspect was water).
My first cycle I went from 180lbs (omg so skinny) to about 188, with a 20k increase on my bench. Could’ve probably got a few more lbs out of it but I really fucked my back up just before starting so my leg training was pretty limited. Second cycle took me up to 195 but I recomped pretty significantly so the weight gain doesn’t tell the full story. 2nd cycle was a tiny bit disappointing tbh, I expected more in the way of gains but I found out after that a lot of people who used the lab I’d used weren’t happy with their recent cycles and the general consensus is the lab has gone to shit. So it goes.
It’s been close to 6 months since my last cycle, and I am gaining naturally just the same as anybody else, with no sign of the gains I made on cycle going anywhere. It actually seems like I gain a little faster since the cycles. I’ve heard that steroids can permanently upregulate your androgen receptors, but I don’t know if it really happens to any significant degree, or if the low dosed cycles I ran would have that effect.
Obviously if I had been running 5g of gear and gone way over my genetic potential I would expect to lose something, but in my opinion (which is mirrored by my experience) if you are below your genetic potential running moderate doses you can absolutely keep your gains.[/quote]
Right on. I’m curious to see what Walk thinks about the androgen receptors. It seems like you could “fire up” more receptors since they are a lot more active on cycle. Again, I’m just making shit up and speculating.
I also wonder if you could kick your natural T levels a little higher with a good, low dose cycle and solid PCT. [/quote]
Low dose is a waste of time IMO. Eight pounds for a first cycle is pretty low, unless it was only four weeks long.
[/quote]
Lol 8 solid lbs is great for a cycle. Go look at a 10lb roast that will give you an idea of wow much solid mass that is. Most bloat up 15-20lbs then lose 10+ lbs. so net gain of 5-10 mass after water. Two cycles like that a year and you’ll be a hulk. [/quote]
I think we both know that’s not quite how it works. I’ll still stand by my opinion that a begginer should gain way more than eight pounds. 15lbs of keep able gains is possible ESP if you are nowhere near your potential. If people are happy with eight pounds for a first cycle then that’s fine, as long as it only lasts four to six weeks.
[quote]strongmanvinny wrote:
Let us all be enamored with friendship and conjoin perhaps at a friendly picnic with bread, salmon, perhaps grapes; maybe even some fresh ham! Allow us to partake in an evening saunter by the lake holding hands; and shall we dine by the glistening shore line partied by the efflorescent myriad of tropical weed and coral in which we admire oh so joyously.
Good golly gee, it sure is a privilege to read each and every post in this thread! See you around friends![/quote]
I’m down
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
steroids really aren’t all that addictive.
I’ve done a couple of low dose cycles. They were fun. Will probably do another one in the future but not anytime soon.
The idea that once you’ve had a taste of the juice you automatically become some snarling vascular beast with no balls who never comes off is every bit as retarded as saying having a couple of pints every now and then will automatically lead to alcoholism.[/quote]
Did you keep most of your gainz? Since you aren’t close to your natty potential, cycling a few times would bring you closer to that and allow you to keep it. Is my reasoning sound at all? [/quote]
I know exactly what you mean mate.
Yeah I did keep my gains. 100% of the strength, and only lost a few lbs of bodyweight (which I suspect was water).
My first cycle I went from 180lbs (omg so skinny) to about 188, with a 20k increase on my bench. Could’ve probably got a few more lbs out of it but I really fucked my back up just before starting so my leg training was pretty limited. Second cycle took me up to 195 but I recomped pretty significantly so the weight gain doesn’t tell the full story. 2nd cycle was a tiny bit disappointing tbh, I expected more in the way of gains but I found out after that a lot of people who used the lab I’d used weren’t happy with their recent cycles and the general consensus is the lab has gone to shit. So it goes.
It’s been close to 6 months since my last cycle, and I am gaining naturally just the same as anybody else, with no sign of the gains I made on cycle going anywhere. It actually seems like I gain a little faster since the cycles. I’ve heard that steroids can permanently upregulate your androgen receptors, but I don’t know if it really happens to any significant degree, or if the low dosed cycles I ran would have that effect.
Obviously if I had been running 5g of gear and gone way over my genetic potential I would expect to lose something, but in my opinion (which is mirrored by my experience) if you are below your genetic potential running moderate doses you can absolutely keep your gains.[/quote]
Some people are comfortable injecting needles into their limbs on a regular basis while a lot of people aren’t.
Is all the effort of spending money, procuring, frequently injecting, maintaining and tapering off worth it for a couple of extra pounds some guy who works harder than you can get naturally in the same amount of time?
Btw, I’m not talking about you rds, just interjecting a new POV into the conversation.
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Btw, I’m not talking about you rds, just interjecting a new POV into the conversation. [/quote]
I see what you did there.
8 does seem low from what I read, but I have no experience to back it up. Some people say they gain 8lbs of water on just a week of dbol. Can’t really imagine what 15lbs of water would look like. So you look like the hulk due to glycogen then it all disappears right away you’re saying?
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:
[quote]rds63799 wrote:
steroids really aren’t all that addictive.
I’ve done a couple of low dose cycles. They were fun. Will probably do another one in the future but not anytime soon.
The idea that once you’ve had a taste of the juice you automatically become some snarling vascular beast with no balls who never comes off is every bit as retarded as saying having a couple of pints every now and then will automatically lead to alcoholism.[/quote]
Did you keep most of your gainz? Since you aren’t close to your natty potential, cycling a few times would bring you closer to that and allow you to keep it. Is my reasoning sound at all? [/quote]
I know exactly what you mean mate.
Yeah I did keep my gains. 100% of the strength, and only lost a few lbs of bodyweight (which I suspect was water).
My first cycle I went from 180lbs (omg so skinny) to about 188, with a 20k increase on my bench. Could’ve probably got a few more lbs out of it but I really fucked my back up just before starting so my leg training was pretty limited. Second cycle took me up to 195 but I recomped pretty significantly so the weight gain doesn’t tell the full story. 2nd cycle was a tiny bit disappointing tbh, I expected more in the way of gains but I found out after that a lot of people who used the lab I’d used weren’t happy with their recent cycles and the general consensus is the lab has gone to shit. So it goes.
It’s been close to 6 months since my last cycle, and I am gaining naturally just the same as anybody else, with no sign of the gains I made on cycle going anywhere. It actually seems like I gain a little faster since the cycles. I’ve heard that steroids can permanently upregulate your androgen receptors, but I don’t know if it really happens to any significant degree, or if the low dosed cycles I ran would have that effect.
Obviously if I had been running 5g of gear and gone way over my genetic potential I would expect to lose something, but in my opinion (which is mirrored by my experience) if you are below your genetic potential running moderate doses you can absolutely keep your gains.[/quote]
Some people are comfortable injecting needles into their limbs on a regular basis while a lot of people aren’t.
Is all the effort of spending money, procuring, frequently injecting, maintaining and tapering off worth it for a couple of extra pounds some guy who works harder than you can get naturally in the same amount of time?
Btw, I’m not talking about you rds, just interjecting a new POV into the conversation. [/quote]
Come on man.
Why compare the gains of a sub par user half adding it and a natty genetic freak?
[quote]willden wrote:
8 does seem low from what I read, but I have no experience to back it up. Some people say they gain 8lbs of water on just a week of dbol. Can’t really imagine what 15lbs of water would look like. So you look like the hulk due to glycogen then it all disappears right away you’re saying?[/quote]
When you are using, depending on the compounds obviously, you will retain much more fluid than if you aren’t.
This extra fluid weight is often confused with muscle gains because lifters do not know any better.
8 pounds of muscle is a lot. Go to the grocers and take a look at an 8 pound roast (thanks for the analogy Jake)
That is a lot of meat.
For reference, 15 pounds of water is a little less than 2 gallons.