The Sane cycle : safe and effective use of steroids

[Fonz]

Originally posted by Big Cat
That's actually older than I am. I mentioned it in my fina profile, and it was based on research that was collected when I was still a kid.

His only innovative idea, was to start pushing r-ALA. And I'm sure that had a lot to do with its 'effectiveness' and fonz's 'charitable heart'.

Half the DNP library was written by.........ME.

When it comes to cutting edge......you're nowhere to be seen.

No offense, but your profiles while wonderous to the newbie.....are nothing special to the initiated.

You need to start getting less off, of the newbie adulation.

Fonz

[Big Cat]

Originally posted by Fonz
LOL

Shows just how little you know.

Kind of funny that a "guru" on supplementation does not look at non-adrenergic means of nutrient partitioning.

I back up what works. if it doesn't.....i'll steamroll right over it.

I can sit here and theorize and postulate etc... but in the end I haven't really done anything to further the science of bodybuilding.

Thats the difference between an engineer(me) and a scientist(you).

I like to put my theories into practice whenever I can.

Non-androgenic means of nutrient partitioning are actually considerably greater with testosterone, boldenone and oxandrolone than they are with trenbolone, which is a very poor mediator. Moreover 19Nor steroids are aldosterone agonists, which tends to increase water retention.

But i suppose you already knew that ? What you are stating here is old news as well.

[Fonz]

Originally posted by Big Cat
Non-androgenic means of nutrient partitioning are actually considerably greater with testosterone, boldenone and oxandrolone than they are with trenbolone, which is a very poor mediator. Moreover 19Nor steroids are aldosterone agonists, which tends to increase water retention.

But i suppose you already knew that ? What you are stating here is old news as well.

And you just managed make yourslef look dumber.

Didn't think it possible.

Non-adrenergic menas of nutrient partitioning are also NON-hormonal and can be used in "off" AAS periods in prder to improve body composition.

Things like CLA,GLA,r-ala and Alcar.

Fonz

[Big Cat]

Originally posted by Fonz
Half the DNP library was written by.........ME.

When it comes to cutting edge......you're nowhere to be seen.

No offense, but your profiles while wonderous to the newbie.....are nothing special to the initiated.

You need to start getting less off, of the newbie adulation.

Fonz

Poor you. I aim to educate in what can be backed up. While you believe yourself to be on the cutting edge, you are really just the next fool bringing back the age old stupidity of trial and error.

Of course I'm nothing special to the initiated. That's why they are initiated. Although I do tend to notice that 80% of those who think they are initiated seriously need to examine what they are doing to themselves.

DNP, what a wonderous substance. Toxic chemical that has actually killed individuals on normal doses (and I was asked to examine the pathology report, so don't even think about bringing that up. Yes it was the kid on EF) and prevents us from doing physical activity. Yes, you have done marvels to promote healthy sport.

[Big Cat]

Originally posted by Fonz
And you just managed make yourslef look dumber.

Didn't think it possible.

Non-adrenergic menas of nutrient partitioning are also NON-hormonal and can be used in "off" AAS periods in prder to improve body composition.

Things like CLA,GLA,r-ala and Alcar.

Fonz

We were talking about trenbolone little bro. I know you like to switch topics because you can't talk yourself out of things, but try to stay with the program here.

[Big Cat]

Originally posted by Juice Authority
Big Cat's style is very informative and most entertaining as he has a tendency to not candy coat things. Most people respect that about him, at least I do. He certainly does have a way with words, which makes for great discussions.

Cept with fonz, when it usually just errupts in him trying to take a pop at me, and failing miserably, after which he resorts to starting a pissing contest and I'm not mature enough to walk away ...

Not that its not amusing, it just tends to get old when its the 5th time in less than a month.

[Fonz]

Originally posted by Big Cat
Poor you. I aim to educate in what can be backed up. While you believe yourself to be on the cutting edge, you are really just the next fool bringing back the age old stupidity of trial and error.

Of course I'm nothing special to the initiated. That's why they are initiated. Although I do tend to notice that 80% of those who think they are initiated seriously need to examine what they are doing to themselves.

DNP, what a wonderous substance. Toxic chemical that has actually killed individuals on normal doses (and I was asked to examine the pathology report, so don't even think about bringing that up. Yes it was the kid on EF) and prevents us from doing physical activity. Yes, you have done marvels to promote healthy sport.

You're talking to probably one of the Top 2 DNP experts in our entire BB'ing internet community.

Don't make me embarrass the crap out of you...b/c your attempt at aloofness failed quite miserably.

Now just shut up...and go back to writing your long winded and incredibly boring profiles.

Fonz

[Fonz]

Originally posted by Big Cat
We were talking about trenbolone little bro. I know you like to switch topics because you can't talk yourself out of things, but try to stay with the program here.

As I thought.

Your Knoweldge is pretty much ZERO in that area.

LOL

And you're a scientist?

Haha....too funny.

Fonz

[Big Cat]

Originally posted by Fonz
As I thought.

Your Knoweldge is pretty much ZERO in that area.

LOL

And you're a scientist?

Haha....too funny.

Fonz

Its your only area of knowledge, I didn't want to take it away from you and leave you with nothing.

Besides, what sort of a stupid remark is that ? Do you ask a physicist why he does not understand the finer points of evolutionary biology ? I mean, is he not a scientist ?

[Big Cat]

Originally posted by Fonz
You're talking to probably one of the Top 2 DNP experts in our entire BB'ing internet community.

You post on 3 or 4 boards, all of them with under 4000 members. Some community.

Don't make me embarrass the crap out of you...b/c your attempt at aloofness failed quite miserably.

YOu have been trying to embarrass me and failed at it miserably since day 1. Take your best shot. What were you gonna say, that kid did not die from DNP ? I'd like to see you make that stick, especially since I have the summary of the pathology report.

Now just shut up...and go back to writing your long winded and incredibly boring profiles.

You forgot to mention correct ...

Later chump change.

[superchicken]

Originally posted by Big Cat
I would have to see it black and white before I would consider recommending it. But if you can verify that topical spiro has no systemic effects, I see no reason why you could not use it.

http://www.minoxidil.com/topical.htm

im having trouble finding the real article for the references they stated but #20 looks like it should have the proof in it judging by the title. but they quoted 4 so all of them prob have somthing in it.

[superchicken]

also big cat, or anyone for that matter, regardling your theory of hcg administration. id like to hear more on it if you dont mind. obviously hcg has been used in days past almost always intermittantly like you exampled. also the medical indusctry seems to do it this way as well, but then again in the medical industry im sure you can agree optimum dosing frequency is commonly compromised in favor of convenience; such an example would be hrt and how they administer cyp every 2 wks. obviously it works but it would work better if administered more frequently. im guessing the same is done with hcg based on the fact hcg can boost test for up to 5 days, so they administer it every 3-7 days. so the patient does not need to inject so many times, based on thier findings that it works satisfactory at that less frequent dosing regime.

however i always thought that a smaller more frequent dose would be beneficial over larger intermitant doses. my reasoning behind this is mainly to not desensitize the leydig cells. i dont know how many units of hcg it would take to actually equal the effects of natural lh released by the body, but i assumed the doses we commonly take of hcg exert much more power/effect than the average lh spike release naturally. because of this i thought using a significantly higher dose of hcg such as 5000iu would be many times more of a hit to the leydig cels than a natural lh spike.

now i do know the body doesnt release lh continuously, it does so in spikes, but it does this multiple times per day, which is far from the once every 5 days thats common in bodybuilding and the medical industry. to take 5 days worth of multiple spikes of lh and cram it into one dose ive always thought must be a major shock to the leydig cells. but obviously just because it is of much greater magnitude doesnt mean it hurts the leydig cells or if it does(which i think it does) it doesnt mean it desensitizes them badly, but it could. that i dont know and obviously it will vary between individuals.

so i guess what im asking is a larger dose sometimes needed to produce an adequet response from the testes? where a smaller dose just wont do anything and a larger dose at once is needed to overcome some threshold in order to produce a satisfactory response?

i always imagined ideally mimicikng the many small lh spikes would be ideal, but just use doses of hcg that would mimic say double a regular lh spike, or tripple or whatever. ex: if 1 unit of lh makes the testes produce lets say 3mg of test, and it takes 2 units of hcg to produce the same 3mg of test, then i think mimicking the many lh spikes but use a dose of hcg like 6units. basically just use more so that the atrophied testes come back at a fast rate, but not too much in fear of desensitizing them.

i just dont see how a dosing regime of every 5 days can be better than what nature has programed us to operate on. i see desensitizing as a side effect of such large infrequent doses. a crude analogy would be suntanning a little every day or for 5 times as long only on one day. youll get sunburned as it was too much at once. now im not trying to compare suntanning to this, because thats stupid to think they work exactly the same, rather im just pointing out the concept.

but in defnse of the infrequent dosing i do see the possibility that ex: 5000iu doesnt really desensitize much at all, there will be a dose where it will, but 5000iu may not be high enough. and also that atrophied testes may just plain simply need a much higher than normal dose to respond adequetly in thier attrophied state. these are the things i dont know and id like your insight on it.

sorry for the long post i had a hard time explaining myself. thanks

[Big Cat]

Originally posted by superchicken
also big cat, or anyone for that matter, regardling your theory of hcg administration. id like to hear more on it if you dont mind. obviously hcg has been used in days past almost always intermittantly like you exampled. also the medical indusctry seems to do it this way as well, but then again in the medical industry im sure you can agree optimum dosing frequency is commonly compromised in favor of convenience; such an example would be hrt and how they administer cyp every 2 wks. obviously it works but it would work better if administered more frequently. im guessing the same is done with hcg based on the fact hcg can boost test for up to 5 days, so they administer it every 3-7 days. so the patient does not need to inject so many times, based on thier findings that it works satisfactory at that less frequent dosing regime.

I have no data to offer. In all truth practical experience seems to indicate some respond well to more frequent injections, others to less frequent injections. So obviously i'm missing a variable here. The reason i'm more inclined to suggest intermittent use is because HCG does supress HPTA.

however i always thought that a smaller more frequent dose would be beneficial over larger intermitant doses. my reasoning behind this is mainly to not desensitize the leydig cells. i dont know how many units of hcg it would take to actually equal the effects of natural lh released by the body, but i assumed the doses we commonly take of hcg exert much more power/effect than the average lh spike release naturally. because of this i thought using a significantly higher dose of hcg such as 5000iu would be many times more of a hit to the leydig cels than a natural lh spike.

1.To point one, the supression on the leydig cells is larger, but the recovery time is longer. Since this is not linear, this should be more beneficial.

2.To point two, we want a higher than natural LH spike, we want to jog these babies back into action short term if we do this post-cycle. i can understand low doses to prevent atrophy during longer cycles, because then its more in our advantage, but here its short term treatment post-cycle. You want to have sufficient stimulation to wake these babies up after 10 or 12 weeks of sleeping.

now i do know the body doesnt release lh continuously, it does so in spikes, but it does this multiple times per day, which is far from the once every 5 days thats common in bodybuilding and the medical industry. to take 5 days worth of multiple spikes of lh and cram it into one dose ive always thought must be a major shock to the leydig cells. but obviously just because it is of much greater magnitude doesnt mean it hurts the leydig cells or if it does(which i think it does) it doesnt mean it desensitizes them badly, but it could. that i dont know and obviously it will vary between individuals.

What you say is correct, but we are not advocating the use of an IV drip for 6-8 weeks for recovery. In this case convenience does take a little priority.

The highest doses I use by the way are 3000 IU, 5000 is a tad too much for my taste.

[prolangtum]

i use 500ius eod, seems to get ther boys back to size.

[Juice Authority]

Big Cat:

There seems to be different schools of thought surrounding the Nolva dosage post cycle. Most seem to favor starting day 1 at 40mg's and tapering down to 20mg's then 10mg's until you complete clomid therapy. The question I have is why taper down the Nolva dosage? Wouldn't it be better to keep the Nolva dosage constant throughout the post-cycle therapy?