This year I want to start my first tren cycle. My idea was:
12 weeks
Week 1 - 12 tren e 100mg/wk
Week 1 - 12 test e 400mg /wk
Week 2 - 14 aromasin 12.5mg EOD
Week 14 - 20 Nolvadex 20mg/ day
Throughout the cycle I will eat about 4000 calories, 50/30/20 C/P/F
The reason I only take 100mg of tren per week is because I want to minimize the side effects. Never had problems with test so I just run my 400mg per week.
My question would be if you think that 100mg of tren e is enough? Would 200mg per week have a big effect on hair loss? Thats my biggest worry to be honest. And when I inject, can I inject tren and test the same day? Let’s say in the morning test and in the evning tren?
1)If you can gain noticable size in 12 weeks on any steroid, you are so underdeveloped you didnt need them in the first place. It would take 4-5 weeks for everything to be really running well, and then you have like 7-8 weeks left of making progress. How much can a human change in this amount of time?
2)100mgs of tren is ridiculous. Yes, you minimize the side effects, but you also minimize the effects. The side-effects are things that come along with the whole reason to use the drug. If side effects are minimized, there is a good chance that the good-effects are also.
If one makes progress on 400mgs of test and 100 or 200mgs of tren in 12 weeks, then this person could make same progress natty, in 20 weeks.
These doses are just stupid. You take just double of what some people take to mimic their natural levels. And by the law of diminishing returns, that 400mgs of test is probably 10% more than someone who has good levels naturally.
Going by the fact that you speak about building muscle but didnt attach pics, ill take a wild guess - there is nothing to show. So, yea… if you are below what average natural is, this will work well enough, i just dont see the point to pay for steroids and risk health and long term sides, to get what everyone does natty, only like 10 weeks faster.
As far as hairloss goes - if you are prone to it, test will be enough to make em go bye bye. Dont take steroids ever, if hair is important, and you think you are prone to MPB.
It’s a pretty low dose. I think you could run EQ at like 500 mg/wk and get better results and less side effects than the 100 mg/wk of Tren. Many seem to get the Tren sides on even very low dose.
If you do run 500 mg/wk EQ, then run like 750 mg/wk of Test. With EQ, you will probably need a longer cycle. I think this would give you closer to what you expect.
Yes. You could use something like RU58841 while on it. If you are losing your hair already, steroids are going to accelerate it. Finasteride works well though. Won’t do anything for Tren, but it will help with Test.
Yep, if it was me, I’d load both in the same syringe for one shot.
You say a lot of dumb shit but this above is actually the dumbest shit I’ve seen by anyone in a long time.
If anyone on here agrees with you on any of these statements then they have zero clue about PED’s as well. Stop posting on every single thread with negativity and now fucking STUPIDITY as well !!!
Nope, cuz i believe the absolute opposite, theoretically, in my own experience and experience of many others I will not stop until people get realistic expectations about cycles. There are much more people who got jack shit from 1g of test than there are impressive physiques made on 400mgs of test.
Remember, some time ago i said that you CAN just NOT reply to my comments. Or you can just mute me and never see any from me ever.
We have had a lot if these talks before. I dont see the point to act like there is a discussion still. You just come in from time to time to attack me. I always post what i believe in and what i have experienced in me or my clients. You disagree and attack me. Well its ok, but the best i can say us - we can agree to disagree and for the 10th time i can ask you to just state your opinion and NOT reply to me always.
If you could just understand that i see you exactly as you see me - i disagree, think you are stupid, i think people who agree with you are inexperienced morons. I just dont attack you every time you post smth i don’t agree with. However you feel abt me is probably exactly how i feel about you. But there is no point to go all over this again and again. I am sure that a month from now you will do this again like we hadnt been through that already. You are like an old wife that bugs a husband about the same things again and again
I’ll play the devil’s or Hank’s advocate here. What I am defending isn’t exactly what Hank said, but in this thread the context is for cycling, not being on 400 mg/wk long term. I’ve seen lots of guys do 10-12 week cycles of 500 mgs a week, bloat up, get a bit stronger, get a bit more muscle. The issue is they end up cycling off, losing a bunch of gains. 12 weeks post cycle, I think the assessment of them being 10% better lines up fairly well with what I’ve seen.
I was just talking with one of my gym buddies that did just that. He almost looked better pre-cycle because he was leaner. His strength shot up on cycle because he was on gear, and eating in a big surplus. He did gain about 15-20 lbs on cycle and is about 10 lbs heavier now. He is still stronger than he was pre-cycle (he kept about 2/3rds of the strength gains). I think though that if he had just gained 10 lbs and trained hard for the whole 24 weeks, he would be close to where he is now physique and strength wise.
I obviously concede that 400 mg/wk perma mini blast would result in more than +10% gains. I know a guy that does this and it works for him (he is quite jacked). He did use a lot more in the past (told me to just take a vial of Test a week if I wanted to get big fast), but for the past 5 or so years, he has kept his dosing more consistent in that 400 mg/wk ball park, and is one of the most jacked dudes I know.
Ditto. So first and foremost 400mg of Test C/E is going to put most users well above double baseline numbers. But, like @hankthetank89 and @mnben87 stated, cycling is usually 2 steps forward 1.75 steps back. I’ve seen dozens of guys do this and most end up looking the same as they did before they started in short order. Some… even worse.
@anon18050987 Your progress pics are amazing. Congrats on that transformation. Super ripped results.
Me either, I don’t want to be identified. Although I am less concerned about it than I used to be since I am only on scripted meds now. I’m done dabbling with the dark side. I don’t see any harm in what you posted for yourself though. Its a great transition and there are not identifying markers in it.
BTW, good to see you back. One day I tried to tag you, and there was nothing. I couldn’t search posts by your tag. Did you do a full delete?
I am currently looking into investing in Novo Nordisk (Ozempic and Wegovy), and perhaps Eli Lilly (Mounjarno). I think both of these companies have products that could be the next big thing in pharma. More than 2/3 of the U.S. is at least overweight. I think these products are what so many other things promised in the past (an Rx that actually works for losing weight).
I am dabbling with semaglutide for my current cut. Works great. IDK how anyone is taking 2.5 mg a week of the stuff though. 0.25 mg has quite the blunting effect on appetite. I’ve lost about 9 lbs in a month so far with basically no will power going towards eating less. I was already losing some weight before hand though, and eat better than the typical American.
That is part of what makes it an appealing investment. Think about if only 1/10th of the 2/3rds of overweight Americans were on an Rx that is $1500 a month. That is a lot of money.
We will see. It did clear the FDA which is some peace of mind. It seems the side effects are likely dose dependent.
I’d agree here.
I see it more as a PED to speed up the process. I think if one is on the path to reach the goal (body weight or fat percent) without the drug, but just gets there faster with it, then it may be sustainable.
For the people who can’t lose an oz without the drug, they will need to stay on it IMO. Kinda like AAS in that regard. Those that can’t eat and train natty and make gains will lose the AAS gains shortly as that was the only factor that got them gains.
I think it odd that the OP has not yet replied to any of the advice (I do understand that it sprouted a few different directions.)
My 2 cents:
Give it a try
IMO 12 weeks is on the high side. I prefer 8, but I always used orals for their quick response.
I see no need for concern to esters of AAS, except that the shorter the half-life, the more often you need to inject. (note: I have never taken an AAS that didn’t have a significant drop in strength starting two weeks after cessation.) The positive effects are gone, but possibly the negative effects could persist, but IMO, not because the drug is still working on your system. Maybe your body hasn’t stabilized from the negative effects of the drug, though it is nearly totally absent from the body.
I would definitely be taking AAS more weeks out of the year than not taking AAS.
I will not stop until people get realistic expectations about cycles. There are much more people who got jack shit from 1g of test than there are impressive physiques made on 400mgs of test.