damn reading bout the dbol bridge is cofusing !

[GreasyGreek]

That old study is largely meaningless to the debate. Mainly because of the proposed dosage being 1/10th of that of the study. Also, Bobo - they still expect you to be able to provide an answer to the three questions regarding the metabolites.

Maybe you are assuming that the time the dbol is bound to the AR or the action of the metabolites is going to prevent recovery.

Maybe Billy and fonz assume that they do not affect recovery.

These ideas are only supported on theory and anecdotes. So, may I suggest we let people who like the idea to continue to profit from it and the ones who do not can seek out alternatives that work just fine for them?

[The REAL Bobo]

Originally posted by GreasyGreek
That old study is largely meaningless to the debate. Mainly because of the proposed dosage being 1/10th of that of the study. Also, Bobo - they still expect you to be able to provide an answer to the three questions regarding the metabolites.

Maybe you are assuming that the time the dbol is bound to the AR or the action of the metabolites is going to prevent recovery.

Maybe Billy and fonz assume that they do not affect recovery.

These ideas are only supported on theory and anecdotes. So, may I suggest we let people who like the idea to continue to profit from it and the ones who do not can seek out alternatives that work just fine for them?

Thats fine with me. I think if you look at the arguements you can see which was has more validity. Those answers cannot be answered directly since there isn't a study done on 10mg of D-Bol. People can say then there isn't prrof but since 2.5mg of Var causes suppression and that Var is less suppressive by nature you can make your own conclusions.


Concerning the metablites, you can just compare a low dose of Var who's metabolites are much less suppressive to those of D-Bol which are more suppressive since it aromatizes. Logically it makes sense that D-bol is more suppressive.

[Billy_Bathgate]

Originally posted by The REAL Bobo
Here we go Billy boy.

"Anywyas, heres one study for you showing no significatn suppression of dbol http://www.anabolicfitness.net/libr...Bol%20Study.pdf "

My response.

Plasma Testosterone Initial Value 19.6 Final Value 8.1
Plasma LH Initial Value 18.1 Final Value 15.4


Another interesting results of this study stated "the results did not support the belief that anabolic steroids increase strength and performance"


This was d-bol at 100mg/day and the results showed no increase in strenght and performance. Seems a little fishy to me.


This is what your basing your theory on? Looks like testosterone was suppressed to me.

the point was the change in the LH, but way to try to take things out of context


Another one by our resident genius.

"did he say lh??? no i dont think so. he said testosterone. testosterone spikes are the highest in the am, first year endo will also tell you that. its on the same fucking point though. to be clear of anythign exengonous by night/early morning. "

BC's response informing him that he doesn't understand.

Hmmm, you missed have slept through that class.

1) GnRH and LH release are the first steps in the axis, these are the two stages where shutdown is initiated. Without this, you've already lost track of your point

2) Testosterone will actually peak several times during the day, if no discernable amount of pressure is displayed. When it is, testosterone will most likely be elevated the most shortly after these periods.

and your point? nothing was proved wrong. I was talking about testesterone, BC was talking about GnRH and LH whats your point? I never disagreed with any of that..the point was dbol is taken during a testosterone spike ....

So double wrong, take a step back and let the grown-ups talk

Here;s a classy one by Billy boy


"your a stupid fuck, do you read your own profiles or do you just cutn paste them from here and there? loook at the god damn half lives. 17-aa is short time for metabolisation. what the fuck are you talking about dipshit "

Once again school is in session.

You amuse me. 4-6 hour half-life. Agree with you completely. But uhm, what about receptor times ? What about the half-life of the metabolites like 17-alpha-methyl estradiol ? This is not kindergarten boy, you want to color pretty pictures then do so. You want to talk shop on biology, pick up a book before you even speak to me, kay

what the hell are you pointing out? we again agreed on everything in here. he brought up a new point of metabolite half life. all i said was that dbol itself is short, which BC points out that he agreees

So lets review. Billy boy didn't read the study correctly. He didn't understand that there are more factors in suppression than just LH. He didn't understand the metabolites cause suppression. \

where did i say that again?



I still would like to know why you use D-Bol if it doesn't promte an increase in strenght or performance. This is coming from the study you posted. This is the person your listening too and taking advice on how to use AAS. Do you think its wise? I don't

where did i say dbol didnt increase strength or performance, ya the study did...but so whats your point? shit, by your terms though...i bet you never use dbol. since its "scientifally proven in this study" lmfao!

Im glad Chemo and YJ are on your board to even things out lol

[The REAL Bobo]

Originally posted by GreasyGreek
That old study is largely meaningless to the debate. Mainly because of the proposed dosage being 1/10th of that of the study.

That study is just meaningless because is extremely flawed. If the scientists admit it. He said it was proof that D-Bol isn't suppressive which clearly is wrong. It shows that it is. But I seem to saying the saem thing over and over again and they don't see it.

[Billy_Bathgate]

Bobo...its funny. You cant answer the 3 questions! You talked all this shit and now you cant walk it? WOW


You see here is the bottom line. Its not going to be proven either way. Neither of us can answer them 3 questions, why? Because there is simply no 10mg Am Dbol to read up on.

IF these guys were soo errogant, they may realise that. Doubtful. Guess we shoudl go by the next best thing...personal experience...oh wait...thats fictional, nevermind LOL!

ANSWER THE 3 QUESTIONS

[The REAL Bobo]

Originally posted by Billy_Bathgate
Im glad Chemo and YJ are on your board to even things out lol

[Billy_Bathgate]

Originally posted by The REAL Bobo
That study is just meaningless because is extremely flawed. If the scientists admit it. He said it was proof that D-Bol isn't suppressive which clearly is wrong. It shows that it is. But I seem to saying the saem thing over and over again and they don't see it.

Nice..keep taking it out of context. That study was shown because of the small changes in LH. Why did I bring that up, cause thats what BC's defence was to about morning testosterone spikes as you kindly quoted just above. No shit they go hand and hand, but how are you being SIGNIFICANTLY ( i like how you pretend I didnt say that word ever...) suppressed...and this is on not 10, but 100mg Dbol.


Anyways, answer the 3 questions.

[CJWolf]

I don't know about the rest of the board ... but this is all BS anyways, it's not like it'll eventually be settled or one side will say they're wrong ... it's just a pissing match that'll go on forever ...

so you have differing ideas ... feel free to differ.

[The REAL Bobo]

Originally posted by Billy_Bathgate
Bobo...its funny. You cant answer the 3 questions! You talked all this shit and now you cant walk it? WOW


You see here is the bottom line. Its not going to be proven either way. Neither of us can answer them 3 questions, why? Because there is simply no 10mg Am Dbol to read up on.

IF these guys were soo errogant, they may realise that. Doubtful. Guess we shoudl go by the next best thing...personal experience...oh wait...thats fictional, nevermind LOL!

ANSWER THE 3 QUESTIONS

Look above. You still stand by that study?


Here go do some research for once and at least try to make it challenging. Or do you want to continue to take a beating? You must be a masochist.

https://www.pubmed.com

[The REAL Bobo]

Originally posted by Billy_Bathgate
Nice..keep taking it out of context. That study was shown because of the small changes in LH. Why did I bring that up, cause thats what BC's defence was to about morning testosterone spikes as you kindly quoted just above. No shit they go hand and hand, but how are you being SIGNIFICANTLY ( i like how you pretend I didnt say that word ever...) suppressed...and this is on not 10, but 100mg Dbol.


Anyways, answer the 3 questions.

Keep backtracking Billy boy. From my post above the whole world can see you haven't a clue.


D-Bol doesn't suppress you everyone. Billy say so.

[Billy_Bathgate]

LOL again, you ignore the 3 questions...LMFAO!!!!

I dont really care about that study. It was just one of the top of my head showing no significant change in LH for dbol. Thats all I cared about it. Ya p-test lowerd. Ya got me...


ANSWER THE 3 QUESTIONS AND QUIT DODGING IT!!!!!!

[Billy_Bathgate]

Originally posted by The REAL Bobo
Keep backtracking Billy boy. From my post above the whole world can see you haven't a clue.


D-Bol doesn't suppress you everyone. Billy say so.

Well that study said it didnnt significantly Myself and others from personal experience have also came to that conclusion.


OF course its fucking suppressive. Thats the whole point of the AM dbol...not the everyday whenever you feel like it dbol.






ANSWER THE 3 Questions!!!!!!!!!!!

[Billy_Bathgate]

Answer the 3 questions or shut up!!!

[Josh]

fuck man this has been going on for too goddamn long who cares - try it if it works for you cool if it doesnt thats cool too, but shit billys gonna be a senior vet before yall get this shit figured out

[The REAL Bobo]

Originally posted by Billy_Bathgate
LOL again, you ignore the 3 questions...LMFAO!!!!

I dont really care about that study. It was just one of the top of my head showing no significant change in LH for dbol. Thats all I cared about it. Ya p-test lowerd. Ya got me...


ANSWER THE 3 QUESTIONS AND QUIT DODGING IT!!!!!!

You don't care? Hmmmm.....Wonder why there Billy boy.


I did answer them. Did you read the posts above or are you selectively filtering things out again.


Hey here's a challenge for you Billy. Can you provide ANYTHING that even makes your arguement somewhat valid?!?!!? Come on Billy, show me you've leanred something here today or should the whole world rely on your blood tests.


Remember people, don't use D-bol. According to Billy's study it doesn't work and it still causes suppression.


I cut and past my answers from above.

1. Since Anavar does not aromatize, E2 levels as a result are low. Its also a mild androgen yet considering all this it still suppresses HPTA function at 2.5mg. Now do you think E2 levels would be higher in 10mg of D-Bol?

2. Doesn't really matter since its half-life is 2 days.


3. Well the first point should help you out with that


Can you follow that Billy boy? Or should we "dumb it down" for you further.