Which steroids don't require higher dosages with each successive use, and which do?

[Chicagoan]

I read that one of the benefits of Sustanon 250 is that it remains effective at reasonable dosages when people use it after having used it before, whereas other steroids such as testosterone cypionate or enanthate generally must be taken in higher dosages with each return use to continue getting good results from them.

Which steroids can be used repeatedly without having to substantially increase the dosages? And which steroids do require such dosage increases?

Also, what explains the difference between these two categories?

 

[BodyByFinaplix]

Start reading the board, and spend some time reading and research how anabolic steroids actually work. Once you do, you are going want to come back and delete this thread, for fear of looking rather silly.

The entire primise of your question is ridiculous. If you make reasonable gains on a given stack, you will always be able to make some gains utilizing it.

The only different between sustanon, test cyp and test enathate are the esters, which would have nothing to do with what you are talking about.

 

[Chicagoan]

Start reading the board, and spend some time reading and research how anabolic steroids actually work.

I've spent time doing both already.

The entire primise of your question is ridiculous.

I disagree. The premise of my post is that the dosage required to obtain a given benefit may change as the person uses steroids. Because steroids can cause numerous changes in users' bodies, including long-term and permanent ones, it is not ridiculous to wonder if one or more of these changes could impact the effectiveness of a steroid.

The premise is consistent with observations of the dosages and results obtained by less experienced versus more experienced steroid users. For example, one experienced user on this board, who notes in his signature that he has taken an enormous amount of steroids, revealed that he takes 500 mg of Winstrol each week just to maintain. Clearly, novice steroid users can experience noticeable gains, rather than mere maintenance, from a lower dose.

If you make reasonable gains on a given stack, you will always be able to make *some* [emphasis added] gains utilizing it.

The question is not whether someone will always be able to get "some" gain from a stack that previously proved effective. The question is whether the user will always be able to get the *same*, or substantially the same, benefit from the same dose in future uses.

The only different between sustanon, test cyp and test enathate are the esters, which would have nothing to do with what you are talking about.

I understand the difference between the three. Testosterone cypionate and enanthate are testosterone esters, while Sustanon 250 is a mixture of four testosterone esters: propionate, phenylpropionate, isocaproate, and decanoate. The esters have different lengths, and thus different lipophilicities, and thus release into the blood stream at different rates.

The fact that Sustanon, cypionate, and enanthate all consist of testosterone esters does not render self-evident the statement that they must have the same return use characteristics. For example, one might speculate that the lower dosages of any given ester allowed by Sustanon permits users to return to it without substantially higher dosages. I am not claiming that this explanation is true, but am merely using it to show that the fact that all three consist of testosterone esters does not necessarily mean that they have the same return use characteristics.

 

[Dial_tone]

I'm on cycle # 9 or 10...I've lost count. I didn't go over 1 gram til my last one and now i'm going right back to the 500mg area, since gains weren't any higher.

 

[DIVISION]

Start reading the board, and spend some time reading and research how anabolic steroids actually work. Once you do, you are going want to come back and delete this thread, for fear of looking rather silly.

The entire primise of your question is ridiculous. If you make reasonable gains on a given stack, you will always be able to make some gains utilizing it.

I agree with BBF on this.

Put your time in on the board and you'll find the information you are looking for.

IMPORTANT: If Time On = Time Off, then you should be able to make the same gains as before. When you start megadosing AAS is when you are pretty much fucked.

DIV

 

[luxury]

"Start reading the board, and spend some time reading and research how anabolic steroids actually work."

I've spent time doing both already.

"The entire primise of your question is ridiculous."

I disagree. The premise of my post is that the dosage required to obtain a given benefit may change as the person uses steroids. Because steroids can cause numerous changes in users' bodies, including long-term and permanent ones, it is not ridiculous to wonder if one or more of these changes could impact the effectiveness of a steroid.

The premise is consistent with observations of the dosages and results obtained by less experienced versus more experienced steroid users. For example, one experienced user on this board, who notes in his signature that he has taken an enormous amount of steroids, revealed that he takes 500 mg of Winstrol each week just to maintain. Clearly, novice steroid users can experience noticeable gains, rather than mere maintenance, from a lower dose.

"If you make reasonable gains on a given stack, you will always be able to make *some* [emphasis added] gains utilizing it."

The question is not whether someone will always be able to get "some" gain from a stack that previously proved effective. The question is whether the user will always be able to get the *same*, or substantially the same, benefit from the same dose in future uses.

"The only different between sustanon, test cyp and test enathate are the esters, which would have nothing to do with what you are talking about."

I understand the difference between the three. Testosterone cypionate and enanthate are testosterone esters, while Sustanon 250 is a mixture of four testosterone esters: propionate, phenylpropionate, isocaproate, and decanoate. The esters have different lengths, and thus different lipophilicities, and thus release into the blood stream at different rates.

The fact that Sustanon, cypionate, and enanthate all consist of testosterone esters does not render self-evident the statement that they must have the same return use characteristics. For example, one might speculate that the lower dosages of any given ester allowed by Sustanon permits users to return to it without substantially higher dosages. I am not claiming that this explanation is true, but am merely using it to show that the fact that all three consist of testosterone esters does not necessarily mean that they have the same return use characteristics.

lol dude... if you want the same exact results every single cycle then you'd probably have to more than double your doses with every cycle, and this holds true for every single steroid.

And I didn't understand about 98% of this post with your failed attempt to sound intelligent. Wtf are return use characteristics??lol. Testosterone is testosterone any way you slice it. The only difference between all of them is at what time they kick in. You'll get the same exact results with all of them.

 

[DIVISION]

I'm on cycle # 9 or 10...I've lost count. I didn't go over 1 gram til my last one and now i'm going right back to the 500mg area, since gains weren't any higher.

Right DT.

Once you reach a point, it doesn't matter how much gear you use, it's not going to induce further hypertrophy.

I don't think anyone should go up to 1GM test under any conditions.

It's not feasible and the sides can only outweight the possible gains.

DIV

 

[BodyByFinaplix]

Right DT.

Once you reach a point, it doesn't matter how much gear you use, it's not going to induce further hypertrophy.

I don't think anyone should go up to 1GM test under any conditions.

It's not feasible and the sides can only outweight the possible gains.

DIV

Agreed. 1000+ mg of test a week should be limited to serious competitors and professional atheletes. The most I've ever used was 700 mg of prop a week (stacked with no other anabolic and using letrozolol) and for those who've seen current pics, I'm a lot bigger than most guys on ehre care to be. There is absolutely no reason to get larger than my size unless you plan on competing as a serious NPC competitor with aspiriations of going pro.

My current stack is 300 mg eq a week, and 50 mg of tren a day, 20 mg of nolvadex a day. I wonder if my tren dose is not too high, sicne I have not started my t3 yet and may not even need the anti-catabolic effects of a dose this high.

 

[BodyByFinaplix]

Bro if you are talking about making the SAME gains on each cycle you are out of your mind. Due to the body becoming more catabolic as a result of it gaining more muscle each time, at a certain point to dose would have to be increased expotentially in order to yield the same amount of net anabolic action (growth rate=the rate at which anabolism excedes catabolism for any given period of time).

For example, as a newbie, I gained 45 lbs (much of it fat and water), but post cycle, I maintained about 20 lbs of lbm, and went from benching 315 for 6-8, to doing 405 for 5 reps, on my first bulking cycle. It was 250 mg of test/200 mg of deca a week for 8 weeks.

At the point I'm at now, it would be virtually impossible for me to gain 20, and keep, 20 lbs of muscle in 8 weeks. Maybe 3 grams a week, stacked with alot of hgh and insulin, but to expect those gains on anythign short of this is completely out of touch with reality. If guys could consistantly gain 20 lbs of muscle on each cycle simply by using more drugs, we would have guys competeing at 400+ lbs in the pros. They could be there in 20 cycles.

 

[BodyByFinaplix]

What many fail to realize, is that the reduced gains over time has nothign to do with the steroids losing effectiveness, or AR's be desenstized, but rather the body elevating catabolism in order to maintain homostatis and limit muscle growth due to evolutionary factors. The human body is designed to survive an ice age or famine, not to be 300 lbs of ripped muscle, which is totally unsuitable for times of hardship.

Hence, the very premise of your question is rediculous.