I’ve been reading alot of different opinions on Equipoise, some people love it others feel like it did nothing for them, some people say it made them have bad anxiety’s… How was your personal experience on Equipoise? Whom would you recommend it for? (someone trying to gain mass or lose bf).
*Very little musclegain even on high cal diet.
*Personally i find it increases jitters or anxiety.
*Need <8%bf to see vascular and hardness benefits
*expensive… costs same as test or deca but dosages need to be at LEAST 600mg/wk and comes generally in 100mg/ml unless ganabol which is 50mg/ml!
*So no good for gaining it seems IMO… what about cutting?
*increases appetite
*probably anabolic enough to rely on for nitrogen retention but it wouldnt be only compound used so why bother…?
Masteron and tren and test for cutting
test, deca, drol/dbol for bulking.
anything else is pointless IMO… mix it about, play around with esters, experiment with stacks but these are proven stacks that work for their purposes i believe.
Brook
One of the problems with steroid books is that to sell, they need:
-
A lot of pages. No one is going to cough up $49, $89 or whatever for a little booklet.
-
To give the impression that there is all kinds of key information about all kinds of things. Just everything has got something interesting and special and important about it. Therefore, page after page, the reader will be thinking “Wow, look at that… good thing I bought this book and learned this fascinating thing!”
So you are not going to get quick summaries let alone something that weeds out the unnecessary and really-not-as-good from the better choices. Everything needs to sound important in its own way. Everything needs at least a page “advertising” it so to speak.
Thus, oh the wonders of all the choices, or so it seems from such sources.
Anyway, my point is that boldenone is one of those unnecessary steroids that we would be just as well off had it never existed, but with the others still existing of course. If others didn’t exist, then it would be very important.
I don’t know how the decision making process in fact went, but to me it makes sense that it was never pursued for human use, pharmaceutically. There are just better choices.
1 Like
There was me thinking you (head-banging) would be disputing the appetite rumour or the increased anxiety…!
It’s a matter of, it doesn’t do anything of a useful sort that developed-for-human-use anabolic steroids will not do as well or better, while offering an inferior side effect profile, in how one feels, and excessively slow clearance.
Not unusable, per se, but just not meriting being in the top choices.
Agree 100% doc.
Anything that increase’s anxiety is from Satan. Thank you guys.
Just wondering does Equipoise increase the production of red blood cells more than other steroids or is this just hearsay?
Upon further research, I too have found that for the amount needed, the cost of the compound, the threat of an unpure product being quite possible depending of the country of origin, and what little it actually brings to the table as in what it provides that more test can’t do, I opted against it.
Increased appetite is a plus, but my friend has never had any trouble force feeding himself. If in a pinch and if in stock at the “evil” drawer, sure, why not he’ll throw it on top but he wont draft a cycle around it.
[quote]andyveg wrote:
Just wondering does Equipoise increase the production of red blood cells more than other steroids or is this just hearsay?[/quote]
Don’t know – again, the style of writing of steroid books is such that on it being a fact that a given thing has been determined of one steroid, with the study cited not having even tried any other
steroid, it becomes trumpeted as a unique property.
Certainly other anabolic steroids do this as well.
Whether boldenone is more pronounced for this than others, I cannot say. Just don’t have a basis one way or the other.
EQ is not needed in any case Id go for tren and test and mast good stuff!
Its good to increase collagen synthesis, since injected testosterone decreases collagen production. Won’t cause much growth - that is what testosterone is for , since testo increases protein synthesis.
The reason you want collagen synthesis is for your tendons and ligaments (as well as your skin) - but for growth you want protein synthesis. You need something for collagen synthesis if you are going to really lift heavy or stay on long term. This means : equipoise, deca, anavar, dbol, hGH (if you are rich like Bill Roberts)
[quote]Zack Nelson wrote:
Its good to increase collagen synthesis, since injected testosterone decreases collagen production. Won’t cause much growth - that is what testosterone is for , since testo increases protein synthesis.
The reason you want collagen synthesis is for your tendons and ligaments (as well as your skin) - but for growth you want protein synthesis. You need something for collagen synthesis if you are going to really lift heavy or stay on long term. This means : equipoise, deca, anavar, dbol, hGH (if you are rich like Bill Roberts)[/quote]
THERE IS NO PROOF OF EQ DOING THIS
I was looking for articles on collagen synthesis cause I have tendonitis in the right bicep and I came upon this.
I was personally really pleased on EQ… except for one thing: the anxiety thing is probably very real. I don’t know if what follows qualifies as anxiety but here goes.
I’ve NEVER had that problem but then I had horrible nightmares about being paralysed from the neck down and unable to die (you know, forced to live against my will by medical means). I was scared shitless by this. Going nuts.
To this day, I still get those nightmares but not as bad. On the flip side, I want to fight for the right of the people to be masters of their own fates! I hate we force people to live like this against their will. Makes no sense at all to me.
Bottom line, if EQ can cause such anxiety, it ain’t worth it! But I’m not 100% sure it was the EQ that triggered this, but there’s no smoke without a fire…
one word…trenbolone!!
i read an article, in MD, I think, that showed that there is a higher amt of muscle tears in subjects (human? pretty sure…) who were administered EQ. Just something I read…
Just came across this old post, and felt the need to correct some misconceptions. Boldenone was not originally developed as a vet steroid, that is a myth. It was always for human use. Why it fell out of use for humans is probably because other steroids were developed that were thought to be better at the time, in the 60’s and 70’s. For some reason the vet pharma companies popularised it after it stopped being commercially produced for use by humans ,as Equipoise. People now incorrectly assume it was a vet only product.
Deca was thought of as a great drug, but none of the dr’s really knew that it gives some people deca dick. Primobolan is a great drug, but it has been discontinued from sale in most countries despite being the safest steroid with the least side effects.
For some reason Deca is still prescribed but steroids with less side effects are not commercially produced.
If given the choice between Deca and EQ I would pick EQ every time. It has the same anabolic rating as deca, without the chance of impotency.
EQ is highly underrated.
2 Likes
Had a very dramatic effect on RBC’s other AAS could be used for catabolic states without the immense risk of patients developing polycythemia
Safer than test? Is it??? How do we know though, is there any data?
1 Like
I think EQ at high doses does have a risk of high RBC. Whether its dramatically bigger than other steroids, maybe, maybe not, I don’t know? I wouldn’t have thought it would be much of an issue at a therapeutic dosage, eg 100mg/week. Despite that it fell out of favour for human use. I haven’t heard of any definitive official reason why it did. Pharma companies like promoting newer drugs, sometimes marketing is more influential than a proven track record. Even at 400-600mg/wk its pretty safe. All steroids become riskier for RBC count the higher the dose.
Primo, safer than testosterone? At therapeutic doses again, it probably doesn’t make a great difference. Primo is less suppressive to the hpta, but if taken at bodybuilding doses any steroid is going to supress you any way. As you would be aware there aren’t many scientific studies about bodybuilding dosages for steroids so the best we can do is anecdotal an observational study.
Primo definitely has less side effects than testosterone especially at higher doses. Much less aromatization=less chance of gyno, and bloating, and acne. With Primo you need fewer ancillaries like nolva or an AI on cycle. Much lower effect on virilization than test. Good for woman, also good for men unless you like shaving your back, as high doses of test will give you a hairy gorilla back. Most guys are going to stack primo with at least a couple of hundred mg of test anyway to ensure libido, and good sexual function.
Primo was always expensive. Whether its more expensive to produce, or maybe because of its favourable properties it commanded a higher price ? Whatever the reason it lost therapeutic popularity to more suppressive drugs like deca.
For me EQ makes the most sense in terms of a primary steroid for a cycle stack, because I 'm not risking deca dick. Its also less androgenic than test so less of the aforementioned side effects balding, acne, gyno etc. Not much chance of getting genuine primobolan these days, so EQ it is.
Then again I’m not a competitive bodybuilder, at the top level most of those guys take risky amounts of steroids whatever the type.
1 Like
When I refer to safer I’m talking about the potential of long term cardiotoxicity. Honestly, gyno doesn’t scare me, neither does hair loss or acne, just the potential cardiovascular and haematological effects really bother me.
As to EQ being phased out, think about it. The majority of AAS prescribed for muscle wasting conditions (not TRT) are oral, c17AA anabolic steroids. Currently for muscle wasting diseases such as HIV the only FDA approved AAS to treat such conditions is oxandrolone, others that are prescribed off label for muscle wasting are nandrolone, oxymetholone, stanozolol (rarely). Look at the drugs FDA approved to treat androgen deficiency, you have testosterone, methyltestosterone, fluoxymesteorne (halotestin) and there might be one more but I forgot. Methyltestosterone and halo have been phased out but I’ve heard or rare instances in which they’re prescribed (fuck, if anyone wants to script me halo for my hypogonadism I’d be super keen to take it, I’m currently located on a small iceberg in the middle of antarctica. While the hepatotoxicity is overstated, long term use is ill advised, hence why the two agents are being phased out
Anyhow there’s two things that strike me here, one, most people don’t want to stick themselves with needles, people have strange phobias about needles. Secondly, in the terms of muscle wasting and androgen deficiency, C17AA derivitaves of testosterone tend to be much stronger than injectable preparations. To reach the the anabolic activity of oxymetholone a far higher dose of EQ would need to be used. Think about it from a doctor’s perspective. A patient comes in, he’s severely malnourished because he’s been starved due to (insert disturbing or sad reason here) the doctor is like “HOLY FUCKIN SHIT YER A WALKING SKELETON” and the patient is like “I don’t appreciate your tone, jokes or insults dr.unreal24278, I’m dying” and then the doctor is like “if we turned you sideways you’d disappear, you’re thinner than a beanpole” and then the doctor thinks (we need to get some weight back on him fast, a low dose should be more than enough in this case, should I give him 20 MG’s of oxandrolone/day for 4-6 weeks (in situations like this the doctor is just trying to restore the individual to a normal weight range as quick as possible, very low doses can reverse this, if he’s so malnourished he’s nearly dead his test production is probably tanked too.), 50-100mgs of nandrolone/week for 12-20 weeks or 100mgs of EQ for 3 months or so, obviously they r going to go with the oxandrolone, acts the quickest, so patient is on for a minimal amount of time
That’s the way I see it anyway. Tren was very strong, I know it was on the market for a while, as to why it was pulled, only speculation can tell because I can’t find any records. Probably adverse affects as a small minority can’t handle tren at all. However if it wasn’t adverse side effects I find that mysterious because tren is very strong, even with a long estered tren like tren hex, a catabolic state would be reversed VERY quickly… Although itd be a disaster if they gave it to women, so I guess that limits the drugs usefullness
On a different note check these two studies out
If humans reacted to tren the same way rats do, it’d be a miracle drug. Too bad they don’t
I Wonder why rats react so differently to nandrolone then.
Also the Antarctica thing is a joke
2 Likes