Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

Finally! A Progesterone Inhibitor!

Makavelli

New member
I was doing some research and came across a couple articles about various estrogen inhibitors. In the articles it stated that Formestane will decrease the progesterone receptors. Unfortunately, formestane is not the easiest anti e to get. You also have to shoot it, as opposed to take a pill like Arimidex. Since everyone is always looking for something to stop progesterone, I thought you guys would like to know.

Also Nolvadex is a weak blocker of progesterone receptors. It will do it, but it's not very strong. I suspect if you combine winstrol with nolvadex you will be fine as evidenced by my own experience and those of my clients.
 
Interesting stuff. I had gyno from deca in the past even after taking nolva. I wonder if this stuff will really work because I'd like to try deca again sometime. K to ya
 
It looks like it will work. If you want to use deca or tren again, try running winstrol and nolvadex with it. I haven't had any problems running tren when I use winstrol and nolvadex and neither had any of the guys that I help.
 
Makavelli said:
I was doing some research and came across a couple articles about various estrogen inhibitors. In the articles it stated that Formestane will decrease the progesterone receptors. Unfortunately, formestane is not the easiest anti e to get. You also have to shoot it, as opposed to take a pill like Arimidex. Since everyone is always looking for something to stop progesterone, I thought you guys would like to know.

Also Nolvadex is a weak blocker of progesterone receptors. It will do it, but it's not very strong. I suspect if you combine winstrol with nolvadex you will be fine as evidenced by my own experience and those of my clients.

So is it an every day injection? IM?
 
I have to vouch for Nolvadex's efficacy at eliminating even Deca induced gyno. It has worked very well for me. Took only 2 weeks to go away at 40mg/day. Thanks to everyone that has helped me out.
 
Does Formestane have any negatives sides we should know about, and does it exist over the net to purchase like an ag-guys sorta website?
 
UFC22 said:
Does Formestane have any negatives sides we should know about, and does it exist over the net to purchase like an ag-guys sorta website?

No, it doesn't have any sides that I know of. It also will increase IGF-1 levels. This is in contrast to most anti-e's whereas they will decrease IGF-1 levels. The only problem is availability. I don't know anyone that has it. Maybe someone can chime in. Satch?
 
Yeah that would be awsome to find it, wouldnt mind using it for a tren cycle this summer jsut to be safe.
 
Makavelli said:
I was doing some research and came across a couple articles about various estrogen inhibitors. In the articles it stated that Formestane will decrease the progesterone receptors. Unfortunately, formestane is not the easiest anti e to get. You also have to shoot it, as opposed to take a pill like Arimidex. Since everyone is always looking for something to stop progesterone, I thought you guys would like to know.

Also Nolvadex is a weak blocker of progesterone receptors. It will do it, but it's not very strong. I suspect if you combine winstrol with nolvadex you will be fine as evidenced by my own experience and those of my clients.


interesting..i may be able to get this soon.
 
Makavelli said:
I was doing some research and came across a couple articles about various estrogen inhibitors. In the articles it stated that Formestane will decrease the progesterone receptors. Unfortunately, formestane is not the easiest anti e to get. You also have to shoot it, as opposed to take a pill like Arimidex. Since everyone is always looking for something to stop progesterone, I thought you guys would like to know.

Also Nolvadex is a weak blocker of progesterone receptors. It will do it, but it's not very strong. I suspect if you combine winstrol with nolvadex you will be fine as evidenced by my own experience and those of my clients.

Good info as always Mak!
 
is this a new drug? Why hasn't it come up before in discussion, or has it? It's seems to be too good to be true... I’m real curious myself
 
anal itch said:
is this a new drug? Why hasn't it come up before in discussion, or has it? It's seems to be too good to be true... I’m real curious myself

It's not new. In fact it's an older AI than Arimidex and Letro. It hasn't come up before because it's not easy to get.
 
Makavelli said:
It looks like it will work. If you want to use deca or tren again, try running winstrol and nolvadex with it. I haven't had any problems running tren when I use winstrol and nolvadex and neither had any of the guys that I help.
Have you had problems with tren or deca before? then no problems with deca and tren while teking the nolva winnie mix
 
madcow502 said:
Have you had problems with tren or deca before? then no problems with deca and tren while teking the nolva winnie mix

I haven't had problems, nor have any of my clients, but I always have them use Nolvadex and winstrol while using tren or deca.
 
Makavelli said:
It's not new. In fact it's an older AI than Arimidex and Letro. It hasn't come up before because it's not easy to get.

It was sold over the counter not too long ago as an anti-e unless the supplement was different?
 
macrophage69alpha said:
actually all AI's reduce PR expression (ER expression as well).... steroidal AI's like exemestane and formestane doe so more strongly.

Did anyone read this???
Formestane is no better at reducing PR expression than Aromasin. In fact, it's weaker. Wake up! You guys are making a big deal out of nothing. No offense Mak.
 
Ulter said:
Did anyone read this???
Formestane is no better at reducing PR expression than Aromasin. In fact, it's weaker. Wake up! You guys are making a big deal out of nothing. No offense Mak.

None taken. I'm just tired of seeing threads about stopping progesterone sides and thought I would tell everyone about formestane. Progesterone is what causes gyno, not prolactin.
 
Makavelli said:
I haven't had problems, nor have any of my clients, but I always have them use Nolvadex and winstrol while using tren or deca.

I had trouble running deca and tren together before. Its kind of hard to run the same stuff again in the same amounts just to test a theory and see if you get the gyno again. Took two years for it to go away last time. And for me the nolva did nothing 80mg ed for 4 weeks.
 
madcow502 said:
I had trouble running deca and tren together before. Its kind of hard to run the same stuff again in the same amounts just to test a theory and see if you get the gyno again. Took two years for it to go away last time. And for me the nolva did nothing 80mg ed for 4 weeks.

Yeah, I understand that. It sounds like you're better off without tren and deca. Did you run Winstrol along with it?
 
no winnie last time. just added deca at 300mg to my current cycle 750 test e 600 eq 30 mg dbol. last time the deca was 600mg. well see what happens.
 
You can use letrozole or aromasin to lower progesterone....in these cases, tumor levels of progesterone are examined, and the study is in women, but it's important to realize that most studies on Anti-E's will be in women...and that nonetheless, these ones show Letro and Aromasin to lower some progesterone levels...while nolvadex actually raises progesterone receptor levels...but first...


And here's some studies showing Letro and Aromasin reduce Progesterone levels, but that nolvadex will raise receptor levels (cause receptor proliferation or upgrade) of them, in the noted circumstances, probably due to various ways in which message the Anti-Estrogen is carring regarding mRNA, estrogen receptor genes, gene transcripts and variants, post-translational modifications of receptor protein products, and in the case of Nolvadex, possibly even interactions with other signaling networks in tumor cells or a possible result from a change in helix 12 (bear with me, because I'm speculating slightly and going off memory a bit):


[Comparison of letrozole and exemestane used in non-adjuvant therapy of endometrial carcinoma]
[Article in Russian]

Bershtein LM, Kovalevskii AIu, Maksimov SIa, Gershfel'd ED, Meshkova IE, Tsyrlina EV, Poroshina TE, Vasil'ev DA, Thijssen JH.


The clinical and endocrine-related effects of 2-week preoperative treatment of endometrial carcinoma patients with a non-steroid inhibitor of letrozole aromatase (femara 2.5 mg/day, n=10) and a steroid inactivator of the enzyme (exemestane 25 mg/day, n=13) were compared. In the first group, pain relief in the lower part of the belly and/or decreased uterine discharge were reported in two cases, as well as a 31% drop in the mean endometrial M-echo (ultrasound) signal. In the exemestane group, two patients revealed moderate uterine discharge decrease matched by a 15.6% decrease in M-signal intensity; no tumor was detected in another patient on completion of the course. Letrozole effect was relatively greater when such parameters as tumor-tissue aromatase level, estrogen concentration in vaginal smear and blood-cholesterol, FSH and LH levels were taken into consideration. However, exemestane therapy involved a relatively sharper drop in the levels of tumor receptors of progesterone and a significantly higher estrogen/progesterone receptor ratio. Hence, no matter how short treatment duration was, both steroid and non-steroid aromatase inhibitors induced effects predominantly associated with lowering estrogen production in endometrial carcinoma patients. This makes a case for further clinical trials of these drugs to deal with the pathology.

PMID: 15909811 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


Effects of tamoxifen on steroid hormone receptors and hormone concentration and the results of DNA analysis by flow cytometry in endometrial carcinoma.

Nola M, Jukic S, Ilic-Forko J, Babic D, Uzarevic B, Petrovecki M, Suchanek E, Skrablin S, Dotlic S, Marusic M.

Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital and School of Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia.

OBJECTIVES: Tamoxifen is a nonsteroidal triphenylethylene derivate with a predominant antiestrogen activity, used in the endocrine treatment of breast and endometrial cancer. It is not known which endometrial carcinomas will respond favorably to tamoxifen and which ones will not. The aim of this study was to find out whether tamoxifen has an effect on hormone steroid receptors, hormone concentration, DNA content, and proliferative activity in endometrial cancer and to correlate the tamoxifen-induced changes with pathologic parameters such as clinical stage, tumor differentiation, depth of invasion, and histologic type. METHODS: Thirty postmenopausal women with endometrial carcinoma were treated with 30 mg of tamoxifen daily for 7-10 days after curettage. Steroid hormone receptors (estrogen and progesterone receptors), levels of follicle-stimulating hormone, luteinizing hormone, prolactin, estradiol, progesterone, testosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate, sex hormone binding globulin, and DNA ploidy and proliferative activity were determined before and after therapy. The patients were also divided into favorable and unfavorable prognosis groups according to classical histological parameters. The patients in the favorable group consisted of patients with stage I disease, well and moderately differentiated tumors, favorable histologic type, and a depth of myometrial invasion of less than (1/3). The patients with only one of the unfavorable parameters (clinical stage II or III, poorly differentiated tumors, unfavorable histologic types, and deeper invasion of myometrium) were included in the unfavorable prognosis group. RESULTS: After the treatment, there was a net increase in the progesterone receptors and sex hormone binding globulin and a significant decrease in the estrogen receptors. The increase in progesterone receptors and decrease in estrogen receptors occurred in the patient group with favorable prognosis regarding histologic type, degree of differentiation, and clinical stage, but also in the unfavorable prognosis group regarding the depth of myometrial invasion. Statistically significant decrease in the follicle-stimulating hormone concentration was observed in the groups with favorable prognosis regarding histologic type, depth of myometrial invasion, and grade of differentiation. Concentration of sex hormone binding globulin was significantly increased in groups with favorable prognosis if histologic type and grade of differentiation were taken into account. On the other hand, there was a significant decrease in the concentration of luteinizing hormone in the group with unfavorable histologic type and also a decrease in progesterone concentration in patients with unfavorable prognosis regarding the grade of differentiation. There was no statistical significance either in the concentrations of other hormones measured or in the DNA analysis by flow cytometry. CONCLUSIONS: Our results revealed that tamoxifen can increase progesterone receptors and decrease estrogen receptors in endometrial cancer. The effect was most pronounced in tumors with favorable clinicopathologic parameters. We conclude that tamoxifen therapy can induce progesterone receptor synthesis even in tumors with low initial progesterone receptor levels, making such tumors potentially responsive to additional hormonal therapy with progesterone. Copyright 1999 Academic Press.

PMID: 10053103 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Letrozole inhibits tumor proliferation more effectively than tamoxifen independent of HER1/2 expression status.

Ellis MJ, Coop A, Singh B, Tao Y, Llombart-Cussac A, Janicke F, Mauriac L, Quebe-Fehling E, Chaudri-Ross HA, Evans DB, Miller WR.

Duke University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Campus Box 8056, 660 South Euclid, Durham, NC 27710, USA. [email protected]

BACKGROUND: The biological basis for the superior efficacy of neoadjuvant letrozole versus tamoxifen for postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive locally advanced breast cancer was investigated by analyzing tumor proliferation and expression of estrogen-regulated genes before and after the initiation of therapy. METHODS: Tumor samples were obtained at baseline and at the end of treatment from 185 patients participating in a double blind randomized Phase III study of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy. These paired specimens were simultaneously analyzed for Ki67, ER, progesterone receptor (PgR), trefoil factor 1 (PS2), HER1 (epidermal growth factor receptor), and HER2 (ErbB2 or neu) by semiquantitative immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: The treatment-induced reduction in geometric mean Ki67 was significantly greater with letrozole (87%) than tamoxifen (75%; analysis of covariance P = 0.0009). Differences in the average Ki67 reduction were particularly marked for ER-positive tumors that overexpressed HER1 and/or HER2 (88 versus 45%, respectively; P = 0.0018). Twenty-three of 92 tumors (25%) on tamoxifen and 14 of 93 on letrozole (15%) showed a paradoxical increase in Ki67 with treatment, and the majority of these cases was HER1/2 negative. Letrozole, but not tamoxifen, significantly reduced expression of the estrogen-regulated proteins PgR and trefoil factor 1, regardless of HER1/2 status (P < 0.0001). ER down-regulation occurred with both agents, although levels decreased more with tamoxifen (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Letrozole inhibited tumor proliferation to a greater extent than tamoxifen. The molecular basis for this advantage appears complex but includes possible tamoxifen agonist effects on the cell cycle in both HER1/2+ and HER1/2- tumors. A pattern of continued proliferation despite appropriate down-regulation of PgR expression with estrogen deprivation or tamoxifen was also documented. This observation suggests the estrogenic regulation of proliferation and PgR expression may be dissociated in endocrine therapy resistant cells.

(Sorry...I';ll postr more later...I'm being kicked offline)
 
Last edited:
ok, so this is going to be an endless debate on which of the anti-e's are best... I've only ever done deca & test cycles until now and have used liquidex to control water retention... it seems to work "ok", not stellar... then again, I have nothing to compare it to yet... apparently aromasin is a stronger anti-e / progesterone inhibitor.... I believe it also doesn't wreck cholesterol levels like arimidex/liquidex can... so far gyno doesn't appear to be a concern for me....so my question is, does aromasin control water bloat better than the other anti-e's?
 
I've posted like 2-3 threads regarding formestane, not one got the number of responses that this one did.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Letrozole: Use it to eliminate progesterone (receptors) !

It's weird that Letro isn't known as an anti-progestin:

Pathological features of breast cancer response following neoadjuvant treatment with either letrozole or tamoxifen.

Miller WR, Dixon JM, Macfarlane L, Cameron D, Anderson TJ.

Department of Oncology, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, UK. [email protected]

Morphological characteristics, grading features, proliferation marker MIB1, apoptosis (by Tdt-mediated duTP-biotin nick-end labelling (TUNEL)), Bcl-2 expression, oestrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) status were compared in ER-positive breast cancers before and after 3 months of neoadjuvant therapy with either letrozole or tamoxifen. Daily treatment was with letrozole 2.5 mg (12 patients) or 10 mg (12 patients), or with tamoxifen 20 mg(24 patients). Letrozole treatment was associated with a pathological response in 17 of 24 (71%) patients. The predominant change in grading features was a decrease in mitosis, and the expression of MIB1 was reduced in all of the 22 evaluable cases. Whilst only marginal changes were observed in ER expression following letrozole therapy, PgR reactivity was reduced in 20 of 21 evaluable cases which were initially PgR-positive, becoming undetectable in 16 patients. Tamoxifen treatment was associated with pathological response in 15 of 24 (63%) tumours. In contrast to letrozole, the dominant change in grading feature was an increase in tubule formation, ER score was markedly reduced in most cases, and the most common effect on PgR was an increased expression. Following treatment with either tamoxifen or letrozole, variable effects were observed on the apoptotic index and expression of Bcl-2. These results indicate that both letrozole and tamoxifen have marked influences on the pathological features of breast cancer during neoadjuvant therapy. However, the effects of the two agents varied such that the phenotypes of letrozole- and tamoxifen-treated tumours differ markedly. Effects on clinical, pathological and biological endpoints were frequently disconcordant--future studies will therefore require the evaluation of multiple parameters in order to fully assess tumour response.

PMID: 12751376 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cancer Res. 1995 Jul 15;55(14):3073-7. Related Articles, Links


Effect of aromatase inhibitors on growth of mammary tumors in a nude mouse model.

Yue W, Wang J, Savinov A, Brodie A.

Department of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, School of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore 21201, USA.

The effects of aromatase inhibitors 4-hydroxyandrostenedione (4-OHA), CGS 16949A, and CGS 20267 [letrozole], and of the antiestrogen tamoxifen (TAM), were studied on the growth of human breast carcinoma in a nude mouse model. To simulate the postmenopausal breast cancer patient, tumors were formed from inoculates of MCF-7 cells transfected with the human aromatase gene to provide a source of non-ovarian estrogen in ovariectomized mice. Tumor growth was significantly inhibited by all treatments (P < 0.05). Greater reduction in growth occurred in mice treated with TAM combined with aromatase inhibitors than with TAM alone. Tumor progesterone receptor concentrations were unaltered by TAM treatment but were reduced by aromatase inhibitors. Progesterone receptor concentrations correlated with tumor growth. The greatest reduction occurred in tumors of CGS 20267[letrozole]-treated mice in which no progesterone receptors were detected. In the ovariectomized mice used in these studies, uterine weight was maintained by estrogen produced from the tumor. Uterine weight was reduced by aromatase inhibitors but not by TAM treatment. However, there was a significant increase in uterine weight in mice treated with the combination of TAM and 4-OHA. Thus, the agonist effect of TAM was evident when estrogen synthesis was inhibited. The results indicate that aromatase inhibitors have potent effects on mammary tumor growth but lack the estrogenic effects on the uterus observed with TAM. There appeared to be no significant benefit in combining TAM with 4-OHA over 4-OHA treatment alone.

PMID: 7606729 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

I'm doing a bunch of research for the people at AG-Guys.com, because they are interested in furthering the use of their products, not just selling them, and have found novel uses for alot of anti-estrogens (letrozole as an anti-progesteron, etc....).
 
Good posts Anthony, but the study showing Nolva increased progesterone was done in cancer patients. I'll look to see if I can find one that involves healthy people. I doubt it though, since most of the research involving anti-e's centers around cancer.
 
Makavelli said:
Good posts Anthony, but the study showing Nolva increased progesterone was done in cancer patients. I'll look to see if I can find one that involves healthy people. I doubt it though, since most of the research involving anti-e's centers around cancer.

I'll have more relevant studies to post when I get home. I'm in the Carribean right now, and have limited internet access...
 
hotnjmuscle said:
ok, so this is going to be an endless debate on which of the anti-e's are best... I've only ever done deca & test cycles until now and have used liquidex to control water retention... it seems to work "ok", not stellar... then again, I have nothing to compare it to yet... apparently aromasin is a stronger anti-e / progesterone inhibitor.... I believe it also doesn't wreck cholesterol levels like arimidex/liquidex can... so far gyno doesn't appear to be a concern for me....so my question is, does aromasin control water bloat better than the other anti-e's?
What dose of liquidex/arimidex were you using? I find 1mg a day works very well with a test/deca cycle, whether in pill form or liquidex. Lots of folks try to get by on .5 or .25mg/day, but I think 1mg works better if you can afford it.
 
djsf said:
What dose of liquidex/arimidex were you using? I find 1mg a day works very well with a test/deca cycle, whether in pill form or liquidex. Lots of folks try to get by on .5 or .25mg/day, but I think 1mg works better if you can afford it.[/QUOTE]


when dealing with something such as this id rather afford something thats gonna help protect me rather then spend that same money on another compound to get me jacked....some people just dont get it....also with the price of armidex there shouldnt be any reason why anyone couldnt use 1mg per day.....i agree with you djsf use the 1mg.....people dont skimp on the stuff that protects your ass.....
 
You all suck. I am really pissed because I mentioned this Formestane a couple of times over the past year. And guess what? No one was interested.

The funny thing is that you could get it from HM Gear over the counter before the ban on prohormones. Smart people knew this and loaded up.

So screw you guys I'm going home!
 
vitamix said:
You all suck. I am really pissed because I mentioned this Formestane a couple of times over the past year. And guess what? No one was interested.

The funny thing is that you could get it from HM Gear over the counter before the ban on prohormones. Smart people knew this and loaded up.

So screw you guys I'm going home!


you can get it from the link I posted on this thread...which everyone overlooked.
 
vitamix said:
You all suck. I am really pissed because I mentioned this Formestane a couple of times over the past year. And guess what? No one was interested.

The funny thing is that you could get it from HM Gear over the counter before the ban on prohormones. Smart people knew this and loaded up.

So screw you guys I'm going home!

Right. I posted this because there have been so many inquiries about how to stop progesterone lately.
 
Formestane is able to be taken orally, unless like someone else said, the sup is different than what your talking about... but I ran a cutting cycle about a year ago with clen/formestane/letrozole and my gyno was goin down VERY well. Wish I had more to run it again, that and letro works great but scared mr. winky away :(
 
whats the absolute lowest dose of winstrol one can run to keep progestin at bay? im very prone to hairloss,depression achy jionts ect.
 
deltron2000 said:
whats the absolute lowest dose of winstrol one can run to keep progestin at bay? im very prone to hairloss,depression achy jionts ect.

There's no definitive answer. I would say the minimum would be 30 mgs/day, but I don't have any studies to back that up.
 
Nate82 said:
Formestane is able to be taken orally, unless like someone else said, the sup is different than what your talking about... but I ran a cutting cycle about a year ago with clen/formestane/letrozole and my gyno was goin down VERY well. Wish I had more to run it again, that and letro works great but scared mr. winky away :(

Formestane can be taken orally but it is recomended that one takes it IM. The orally bullshit was so HM Gear could sell it. The bioavailibilty is diminished in da belly.
 
any of you guys advise the use of bromo throughout the cycle to control sides?
 
deltron2000 said:
any of you guys advise the use of bromo throughout the cycle to control sides?

I would use Dostinex over Bromo. Remember though that it will only suppress prolactin, it will not affect progesterone.
 
i will have both on hand, im getting some stanobols and some bromo or cabaser. dostinex will do the same thing bromo does right?
 
deltron2000 said:
i will have both on hand, im getting some stanobols and some bromo or cabaser. dostinex will do the same thing bromo does right?

Dostinex will do the same thing bromo does, but without the sides.
 
djsf said:
What dose of liquidex/arimidex were you using? I find 1mg a day works very well with a test/deca cycle, whether in pill form or liquidex. Lots of folks try to get by on .5 or .25mg/day, but I think 1mg works better if you can afford it.


I try to use as close to 1mg of liquidex as I can.... cost is definitely not an issue.... I don't always measure it out with a needle so I kind of eyeball it... I didn't use liquidex the last time around and I was definitely alot more bloated.... so it does seem to be working to an extent...can still see some facial bloat....
 
djsf said:
What dose of liquidex/arimidex were you using? I find 1mg a day works very well with a test/deca cycle, whether in pill form or liquidex. Lots of folks try to get by on .5 or .25mg/day, but I think 1mg works better if you can afford it.

Actually, take a look at this graph:
eg0706676001.gif


Basically it shows that half a mg is similar to a full mg of Arimidex for purposes of testosterone elevation and estrogen lowering.

References:

(1) J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2000 Jul;85(7):2370-7, "Estrogen Suppression in Males"
 
Impact Ultra made by ALRI has Formestane Acetate in it along with a couple other goodies. It is marketed as a sterile oral solution, but it is supposed to be IM'ed. It is true it is hard to find formestane acetate, but the base is sold at some bulk nutrition websites.

The problem with the Impact Ultra is that the phosphatydlserine crashed out, so it must be reheated to get it back into solution then transfer into a regular vial. ALRI discontinued it, and I just bought up what I could find on the net. There is a UK site that sells it.

Before any says the stuff is crap, I can vouch for it and say it is not. My crew uses it as part of their PCT, and it has to be one of the best additions we've made to PCT in a while. We have a two pro strongman in the group along with an elite level 220 PLer. Our results are great so it doesn't matter if someone says it is not any good (which is what I see quite often on here).

The Impact Ultra should be done 1cc EOD because of the acetate ester. It is pain free (at least for me).

As far as arimidex and letrozole, they only bind the aromatase enzyme temporarily and are not suicide inhibitors like the exestame and formestane. There can be a rebound with discontinuance of the arimidex and letrozole so be careful.
 
strongCHE What does is that actually, in MG? looking into possiby makin a suspension for upcoming cycle, and was wondering how much i should use IM...

Anyone else know? Or how much to take orally? it worked well for me orally, but i think i was taking a couple 100mg's a day, liek 3 or 400 i do believe... How much is getting deactivated by taking it orally, hmm.
 
Makavelli said:
I would use Dostinex over Bromo. Remember though that it will only suppress prolactin, it will not affect progesterone.

well i see for myself as i justed popped some cabaser exclusivly for my gyno situation. im going to post my results good or bad.


makavali is a smart mofo. i would have to say with 100% confidence he is mod material w/out a doubt.


mak for mod?

you deserve it bro
 
deltron2000 said:
well i see for myself as i justed popped some cabaser exclusivly for my gyno situation. im going to post my results good or bad.


makavali is a smart mofo. i would have to say with 100% confidence he is mod material w/out a doubt.


mak for mod?

you deserve it bro

Let us know what happens. Thanks for da props brotha... ;)
 
Why not just use the Letrozole? You can order it from AG-Guys, and remember...it pretty much removes all your estrogen...progesterone alone probably can not cause gyno (I'm 99.99% sure of this, as per the research I've done)...so why search for other, more esoteric and expensive compounds?
 
anthony roberts said:
Why not just use the Letrozole? You can order it from AG-Guys, and remember...it pretty much removes all your estrogen...progesterone alone probably can not cause gyno (I'm 99.99% sure of this, as per the research I've done)...so why search for other, more esoteric and expensive compounds?


are you deaf?

i sucked down so much letro i thought my joints where gonna burst. your skewing the perception here of reader's. letro wont help i kNOW FROM EXPERIENCE not from arm chair research.

sorry if i come off as testy but i cant stand spew. ( anymore)
 
anthony roberts said:
Actually, take a look at this graph:
eg0706676001.gif


Basically it shows that half a mg is similar to a full mg of Arimidex for purposes of testosterone elevation and estrogen lowering.

References:

(1) J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2000 Jul;85(7):2370-7, "Estrogen Suppression in Males"
Very interesting info! K to you. If that is really true, folks can save a lot of $$ on their arimidex. But I am not convinced.

Here is a link to the referenced study: http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/full/85/7/2370

It appears the study was performing an experiment to see how much test levels are increased from baseline levels in "normal men" by just taking arimidex. This is not the same thing as protecting oneself from the extremely high testosterone levels an AAS user is likely to have. If I am understanding the study correcty, all they did was observe that the body stops converting background levels of test into background levels of estrogen (thereby slightly elevating the amount of test available because it is not converted). Since so little testosterone is involved (normal levels in young men), it's no wonder .5mg worked the same as 1mg!

For AAS users whose test levels are MANY times that of the young men in the study, I am not convinced .5mg would work the same as 1mg. So this study, fascinating as it is, might not be completely relevant for the bros here to are taking 500, 700 or 1000mg of test a week.
 
djsf said:
Very interesting info! K to you. If that is really true, folks can save a lot of $$ on their arimidex. But I am not convinced.

Here is a link to the referenced study: http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/full/85/7/2370

It appears the study was performing an experiment to see how much test levels are increased from baseline levels in "normal men" by just taking arimidex. This is not the same thing as protecting oneself from the extremely high testosterone levels an AAS user is likely to have. If I am understanding the study correcty, all they did was observe that the body stops converting background levels of test into background levels of estrogen (thereby slightly elevating the amount of test available because it is not converted). Since so little testosterone is involved (normal levels in young men), it's no wonder .5mg worked the same as 1mg!

For AAS users whose test levels are MANY times that of the young men in the study, I am not convinced .5mg would work the same as 1mg. So this study, fascinating as it is, might not be completely relevant for the bros here to are taking 500, 700 or 1000mg of test a week.

Great post. I agree that the more Arimidex one uses the less estrogen and less bloat. I just bumped my Arimidex up to 2 mgs/day last week and I started losing water quickly. So that's proof enough for me that the more you use, the less estrogen you'll have.
 
I know I'm going to get flamed for this, probably. But, as a couple people know, I've bought the formestane powder and just made an injectible gel out of it. I've never got it to stay in solution, so heat and shaking is in order. I've used it here and there (many many injections over the years, usually about 1/2 to 1 cc of a 300 mg. per mL concentration- I mean, hey, it won't stay in solution at a low concentraition anyhow...). I've liked my results from it. I sometimes use it for pct/ tapering. The only thing is, that you'll lose some of it in the needle with smaller needles (a portion won't make it through- depending on what gauge pin and how concentrated your mix is). I know I'm crazy, but, knock on wood, no problems whatsoever.

Just throwing this in. I'm not reccomending it for anyone else.


Jacob
 
jacshelb said:
I know I'm going to get flamed for this, probably. But, as a couple people know, I've bought the formestane powder and just made an injectible gel out of it. I've never got it to stay in solution, so heat and shaking is in order. I've used it here and there (many many injections over the years, usually about 1/2 to 1 cc of a 300 mg. per mL concentration- I mean, hey, it won't stay in solution at a low concentraition anyhow...). I've liked my results from it. I sometimes use it for pct/ tapering. The only thing is, that you'll lose some of it in the needle with smaller needles (a portion won't make it through- depending on what gauge pin and how concentrated your mix is). I know I'm crazy, but, knock on wood, no problems whatsoever.

Just throwing this in. I'm not reccomending it for anyone else.


Jacob

how does it stack up against other antiestrogens you've used?
 
Top Bottom