Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
JoeBrooklyn1969
Banned
Isnt a study part of science? I didnt get that comment.
.jpg "Research Chemical Sciences")
.png "Research Chemical Sciences")
Suppression From Standalone Proviron
- Thread starter tstarks
- Start date
you are best served going by personal experience of guys and being your own guinea pig.
as i stated above. it can make a major difference when you run UG vs. pharma grade. dosages can be wildly off. some guys can run 250mg of sustanon pharma grade and have better reactions then running a gram of UG stuff. newbs tend to be too obsessed with studies which is great, but in reality it doesn't do much of anything to depend on them to run successful cycles. its much more beneficial to listen to others personal experiences than go by studies. if its legit proviron then 50mg a day is ample. you don't need to even use 100mg a day.
as far as the supplement concern. it is well known that milk thistle helps cleanse the liver hence bodybuilders use it.. its been used for hundreds of years so this is nothing new. taurine helps reduce pumps, not something new but bodybuilders use it when running clen or AAS which give pumps.. hcgenerate has natural herbs which help stimulate the testes, if you run a cycle and your nuts turn to raisins then take some hcgenerate and watch them plump back up like magic. unleashed.. pop a few of those before a workout or sex and feel the difference in strength and stamina. you will know it works. these are easy to figure out if they work.. i've taken lots of supplements over the years and you will know pretty quickly which supps are bs and which actually work. if anything i wouldn't bother with studies with them, anyone can make a bullshit study and make an infomercial on tv and try to sell you a bs supplement, we see that all the time with 'diet pills' that are backed by doctors and studies. hence my point don't get caught up in studies because we do not know where it came from or what motivation there was to have that 'study' there were studies also that showed that cigarettes weren't harmful too, and docs would go on tv and say X brand was the brand to use.. you can find those ads on youtube. so no studies ARE NOT SCIENCE. studies are sponsored by an entity and you can run 100 studies and have 1 show what you want it to show and then publish that. the wine industry puts out studies showing red wine is good for the heart and people believe that too. alcohol good for you? really? but most people believe it.
as for your proviron thing go for it, however i am 99% sure you will have suppression. I wish we could take AAS and not suffer suppression, that would be wonderful, but its a pipe dream. the body will notice any foreign androgen or anabolic substance and start being suppressed. having said that you are right and I do not disagree that running proviron for a short time in bursts will have minimal effects on the HPTA. I just think you would be much more happy with your results running non suppressive legit supplements vs. fiddling around with proviron.
we can have this arguement all day. you could tell me "steve AAS will shrink your dick, prove to me in a study it doesn't" then how would i be able to disprove that? i couldn't... or a general statement like "steve AAS will kill you, its very dangerous and you will end up with brain cancer like that Raiders player and die a horrible death" there aren't studies on AAS proving one thing or another out there to really know..
however due to experience of myself and others with a lot of experience we can safely say without a shadow of a doubt thats not true. so my advice again is take advantage of HARDCORE boards like these and LISTEN to experienced guys, don't listen to what you read online or studies or media or your X gf or your friend at the gym who uses bb.com. THATS THE REAL SCIENCE.
as i stated above. it can make a major difference when you run UG vs. pharma grade. dosages can be wildly off. some guys can run 250mg of sustanon pharma grade and have better reactions then running a gram of UG stuff. newbs tend to be too obsessed with studies which is great, but in reality it doesn't do much of anything to depend on them to run successful cycles. its much more beneficial to listen to others personal experiences than go by studies. if its legit proviron then 50mg a day is ample. you don't need to even use 100mg a day.
as far as the supplement concern. it is well known that milk thistle helps cleanse the liver hence bodybuilders use it.. its been used for hundreds of years so this is nothing new. taurine helps reduce pumps, not something new but bodybuilders use it when running clen or AAS which give pumps.. hcgenerate has natural herbs which help stimulate the testes, if you run a cycle and your nuts turn to raisins then take some hcgenerate and watch them plump back up like magic. unleashed.. pop a few of those before a workout or sex and feel the difference in strength and stamina. you will know it works. these are easy to figure out if they work.. i've taken lots of supplements over the years and you will know pretty quickly which supps are bs and which actually work. if anything i wouldn't bother with studies with them, anyone can make a bullshit study and make an infomercial on tv and try to sell you a bs supplement, we see that all the time with 'diet pills' that are backed by doctors and studies. hence my point don't get caught up in studies because we do not know where it came from or what motivation there was to have that 'study' there were studies also that showed that cigarettes weren't harmful too, and docs would go on tv and say X brand was the brand to use.. you can find those ads on youtube. so no studies ARE NOT SCIENCE. studies are sponsored by an entity and you can run 100 studies and have 1 show what you want it to show and then publish that. the wine industry puts out studies showing red wine is good for the heart and people believe that too. alcohol good for you? really? but most people believe it.
as for your proviron thing go for it, however i am 99% sure you will have suppression. I wish we could take AAS and not suffer suppression, that would be wonderful, but its a pipe dream. the body will notice any foreign androgen or anabolic substance and start being suppressed. having said that you are right and I do not disagree that running proviron for a short time in bursts will have minimal effects on the HPTA. I just think you would be much more happy with your results running non suppressive legit supplements vs. fiddling around with proviron.
we can have this arguement all day. you could tell me "steve AAS will shrink your dick, prove to me in a study it doesn't" then how would i be able to disprove that? i couldn't... or a general statement like "steve AAS will kill you, its very dangerous and you will end up with brain cancer like that Raiders player and die a horrible death" there aren't studies on AAS proving one thing or another out there to really know..
however due to experience of myself and others with a lot of experience we can safely say without a shadow of a doubt thats not true. so my advice again is take advantage of HARDCORE boards like these and LISTEN to experienced guys, don't listen to what you read online or studies or media or your X gf or your friend at the gym who uses bb.com. THATS THE REAL SCIENCE.
Last edited:
just to add to what steve said... there is always a study somewhere that can or will counteract another study done that will provide conflicting answers and results... one of the main things with proviron is there is a lot of bunk shit that goes around... the true pharm grade proviron will do much more than the ug shit... and as steve said, if you get the good shit, there is no need to exceed 100 mg on it... i just got done taking pharm grade and dosed 50 for 4 of the 6 weeks and that definitely did the job... i bumped it the last two weeks and it was great but the point is that 50 was great as well... trying things on yourself is the only true way to know because we all respond differently... that's why there's so many fucking studies out there because they know that by testing different people, there will be different results, thus justifying their so called "theories"
I love the fact that there is a lot of research being done here and topics like these can be fun and interesting to talk about it...
I love the fact that there is a lot of research being done here and topics like these can be fun and interesting to talk about it...
JoeBrooklyn1969
Banned
I agree that personal experience trumps studies because what works for some people may not work for you and getting advice from other people like this forum is also helpful. I also agree that often times studies are sponsered by some enitity that has a financial stake but you can be biased an still be factually correct and relying om studies alone would be foolish but discounting ALL studies would be just as foolish.
stevesmi, I agree with much of what you said bro, but I believe you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. Yes, you will suffer suppression from proviron, no doubt, but at the doses of 25-100 or 150 mg, the suppression will me so minimal as to be insignificant (as shown by blood tests). I'm not disagreeing with the HPTA feedback model, which simply states that increased androgen/estrogen/progesterone will result downstream in decreased hormonal output. That's well established science. HOW MUCH will hormonal output be decreased? Well, it's not always a set amount and it will depend. With something like tren, complete shutdown of course. Anavar, severe suppression, or moderate, depending on dose, duration. Proviron, at the dose I mentioned, barely anything. Going up into the 300+ mg, and perhaps even 200, more severe suppresison. And yes, of course UG lab stuff should be avoided whenever possible--they don't test that stuff. It's evident that the studies apply only to pharma grade proviron, not UG proviron.
But I have to admit your position on science and studies in general, as well as on Unleashed/HCGenerate, puzzles me. On the one hand, you seem to be exhibiting great skepticism toward all scientific studies. Nothing necessarily wrong with that. But on the other hand, you recommend UCGenerate on the grounds that it makes your nuts "plump", and Unleashed on the grounds that you can "feel the difference". Am I reading you wrong here? I realize some studies have shady funding, are biased, &c, &c. But studies like that are usually studies on supplements funded by supp complanies, and are not peer reviewed. I get the impression overall that you are more skeptical of studies than you are of broscience, and would sooner believe some guys on the internet talking about how some supplement raises testosterone because their nuts grew to the size of golf balls and they ejaculated 50 ft, than peer reviewed literature, which according to you is not to be trusted at all beause it may be funded by the wrong people. Forgive me if I have it wrong, but it seems like this is what you're saying. No, as you said, studies are not science, and I never claimed that. I claimed studies were A PART of science, and an integral part of science. Without them, science wouldn't get very far and would have to rely on a bunch of bros murmuring on the internet about they can "feel" a supplement/drug working.
It really doesn't matter how good/experienced a person is, he simply cannot state much from personal experience other than his subjective feelings, which are, among other things: 1) subject to placebo effect, and 2) even if it isn't placebo, you often don't really know what it indicates (for example, is the increased libido from increased testosterone, or purely dopaminergic?). Most of the people I've known who were not newbies and have trained a while have taken this position more and more.
1) The only way you can know if a supplement that claims to alter certain chemicals in your body is bs or actually works is either from tests on yourself/people you trust, or from studies (preferably several peer reviewed studies, not just one or two shady ones--skepticism is of course warranted).
2) Given that the supplements you mention DO claim to make such alterations, you very well SHOULD bother with studies with them, either in journals or self-tested, especially if you rely on them for something as important as PCT. (Again, I'm not familiar with the ingredients, so bare with me.)
3) Infomercials have absolutely nothing to do with anything, I don't know why you even mention them. It's obvious that infomercials, supplements companies, and other such entities sometimes use studies that are either shady or not peer reviewed, or misinterpret/extrapolate way too much from legit studies (i.e., using in vitro studies to reach in vivo conslusions).
That's because studies that involve AAS do not use them in a bodybuilding-type environment, nor is their purpose to tell the lifter the best way to cycle whatever-drol for optium muscle gain and minimum shutdown. In this situation, we must take what we can from them, while--I agree--listening to the numerous experienced guys who've been doing them in the decades they have been around, studying the endocrine and the HPTA, &c. The purpose of the studies I presented though was not to prove anything about muscle building or how to cycle proviron, it was to directly demonstrate what sort of effect proviron had on the HPTA, whether it warranted cycling at all.
There is tons of peer reviewed literature out there on AAS proving many things.
But I have to admit your position on science and studies in general, as well as on Unleashed/HCGenerate, puzzles me. On the one hand, you seem to be exhibiting great skepticism toward all scientific studies. Nothing necessarily wrong with that. But on the other hand, you recommend UCGenerate on the grounds that it makes your nuts "plump", and Unleashed on the grounds that you can "feel the difference". Am I reading you wrong here? I realize some studies have shady funding, are biased, &c, &c. But studies like that are usually studies on supplements funded by supp complanies, and are not peer reviewed. I get the impression overall that you are more skeptical of studies than you are of broscience, and would sooner believe some guys on the internet talking about how some supplement raises testosterone because their nuts grew to the size of golf balls and they ejaculated 50 ft, than peer reviewed literature, which according to you is not to be trusted at all beause it may be funded by the wrong people. Forgive me if I have it wrong, but it seems like this is what you're saying. No, as you said, studies are not science, and I never claimed that. I claimed studies were A PART of science, and an integral part of science. Without them, science wouldn't get very far and would have to rely on a bunch of bros murmuring on the internet about they can "feel" a supplement/drug working.
It really doesn't matter how good/experienced a person is, he simply cannot state much from personal experience other than his subjective feelings, which are, among other things: 1) subject to placebo effect, and 2) even if it isn't placebo, you often don't really know what it indicates (for example, is the increased libido from increased testosterone, or purely dopaminergic?). Most of the people I've known who were not newbies and have trained a while have taken this position more and more.1) The only way you can know if a supplement that claims to alter certain chemicals in your body is bs or actually works is either from tests on yourself/people you trust, or from studies (preferably several peer reviewed studies, not just one or two shady ones--skepticism is of course warranted).
2) Given that the supplements you mention DO claim to make such alterations, you very well SHOULD bother with studies with them, either in journals or self-tested, especially if you rely on them for something as important as PCT. (Again, I'm not familiar with the ingredients, so bare with me.)
3) Infomercials have absolutely nothing to do with anything, I don't know why you even mention them. It's obvious that infomercials, supplements companies, and other such entities sometimes use studies that are either shady or not peer reviewed, or misinterpret/extrapolate way too much from legit studies (i.e., using in vitro studies to reach in vivo conslusions).
That's because studies that involve AAS do not use them in a bodybuilding-type environment, nor is their purpose to tell the lifter the best way to cycle whatever-drol for optium muscle gain and minimum shutdown. In this situation, we must take what we can from them, while--I agree--listening to the numerous experienced guys who've been doing them in the decades they have been around, studying the endocrine and the HPTA, &c. The purpose of the studies I presented though was not to prove anything about muscle building or how to cycle proviron, it was to directly demonstrate what sort of effect proviron had on the HPTA, whether it warranted cycling at all.
There is tons of peer reviewed literature out there on AAS proving many things.
dtwentyfour
New member
Any update? Did original poster try standalone proviron?
Similar threads
