Test is Test Deca is Deca

I am reading a lot about NPP having less sides than ND. why?

If TP (Testosterone Propinate) has the same sides as TE (Testosterone Enanthate) than why are people claiming NPP causes less bloat, less gyno etc?

The only thing that i would agree with is that it is less supressive only because of its shorter lasting ester.

As I already said, if someone is gyno sensitive, he will get it from NPP. Bottom line, it's nandrolone.

The main advantage of NPP would be that the short ester allows higher blood concentrations at the beginning of the cycle so that the "effects" are felt sooner. Also after the last shot, it clears within days instead of weeks, so suppression will end sooner.

I ordered NPP but the order got messed up and I got deca. I front-loaded 600mg and two days later another 300mg. Four days into the cycle, I am already feeling feel like I am gaining water and I am starting to get pumps. So front-loading can cause deca to "feel" like NPP. I solve the clearance time issue and progestorone related suppression by stopping deca after 6 weeks and then starting EQ for another 6 weeks.

Yes this is true "NPP would be that the short ester allows higher blood concentrations at the beginning of the cycle", also one of the biggest advantages is that you dont get the cummulative effect of the longer esters throughout your cycle. No one is saying that nandrolone isnt nandrolone, hence the "N" in NPP, its just fast acting Deca. Its all about the ester. You ask anyone what they would rather run ... Enanthate or prop, and if it werent for the frequest injectoins, most would choose prop.

I try to stay away from nandrolone....excpet tren here and there...But i may be done with that as well...

Well its a pretty safe bet that if you really dont like Deca, then NPP is not for you either.

I was reading yesterday on pubmed that deca loses reasonable peak levels after 2 weeks. Furthermore, NPP in a small study was as suppressive as deca, and surprisingly, it was really the LH problems with nandrolone that are the biggest factor for some individuals in recovery. Therefore, if LH problems get you, you can be suppressed for 3-4 months with NPP or deca, since it's suppression is not really descended from the drug hanging around in the body. There really is no difference between NPP and deca in most people. Makes sense when you think about it . . . good thread.

Can you post those studies up bro? I would be very interested to read them. Thanks!

majutsu said:

Furthermore, NPP in a small study was as suppressive as deca, and surprisingly, it was really the LH problems with nandrolone that are the biggest factor for some individuals in recovery. Therefore, if LH problems get you, you can be suppressed for 3-4 months with NPP or deca, since it's suppression is not really descended from the drug hanging around in the body.

Click to expand...

If LH is the problem is the main culrpit for those who find it hard to recover from Deca, I wonder how many are using HCG for PCT?

HCG is a prescription fertility agent that mimics the bodies own natural LH, and should be included in most PCTs anyways, I am starting to think that its a MUST for Deca/NPP.

I would say that in essence NPP/Deca users should be looking to shock the testes with an overwhelmingly high level of LH activity from the HCG for rapid restoration of original testicular mass and functioning, and use only the anti-es for support in PCT. Please post up the studies if at all possible.

Cheers,
Mavy

I will try to find. I saw them online as I was reading around about nandrolone and methenolone (another question . . . ). Now that you mention it, I remember their PCT protocol had what seemed to me like tons of HCG, more than I'd seen, probably for this reason.

not entirely related, but still interesting

J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1997 Apr; 281(1): 93-102. Related Articles, Links


Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of nandrolone esters in oil vehicle: effects of ester, injection site and injection volume.

Minto CF, Howe C, Wishart S, Conway AJ, Handelsman DJ.

Department of Anaesthesia and Pain Management, Royal North Shore Hospital, University of Sydney, Australia.

We studied healthy men who underwent blood sampling for plasma nandrolone, testosterone and inhibin measurements before and for 32 days after a single i.m. injection of 100 mg of nandrolone ester in arachis oil. Twenty-three men were randomized into groups receiving nandrolone phenylpropionate (group 1, n = 7) or nandrolone decanoate (group 2, n = 6) injected into the gluteal muscle in 4 ml of arachis oil vehicle or nandrolone decanoate in 1 ml of arachis oil vehicle injected into either the gluteal (group 3, n = 5) or deltoid (group 4, n = 5) muscles. Plasma nandrolone, testosterone and inhibin concentrations were analyzed by a mixed-effects indirect response model. Plasma nandrolone concentrations were influenced (P < .001) by different esters and injection sites, with higher and earlier peaks with the phenylpropionate ester, compared with the decanoate ester. After nandrolone decanoate injection, the highest bioavailability and peak nandrolone levels were observed with the 1-ml gluteal injection. Plasma testosterone concentrations were also influenced (P < .001) by the ester and injection site, with the most rapid, but briefest, suppression being due to the phenylpropionate ester, whereas the most sustained suppression was achieved with the 1-ml gluteal injection. Plasma inhibin concentrations were also significantly influenced by injection volume and site, with the lowest nadir occurring after the nandrolone decanoate 1-ml gluteal injection. Thus, the bioavailability and physiological effects of a nandrolone ester in an oil vehicle are greatest when the ester is injected in a small (1 ml vs. 4 ml) volume and into the gluteal vs. deltoid muscle. We conclude that the side-chain ester and the injection site and volume influence the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of nandrolone esters in an oil vehicle in men.