Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
FRONTLOADING: Reality or Myth?
- Thread starter SUST-MAN
- Start date
SofaGeorge said:
Let me ask you this.. If you planned to use (for the sake of discussion) 75mg of trenbolone acetate/day on a cycle.
Would you start by taking 25mg ED for the first week followed by 50mg for the second and then finally getting up to 75mg ED by the third?
Well, you should if you believe that front loading does not work. This is similar to what happens when you take a long ester, such as deca, at xmg/week with no front load. YOu don't see maximal gains until you are built up to maximal theraputic blood levels. For deca, this doesn't happen until AT LEAST the third week when you run a constant dose (this is readily varified mathematically, btw)..
It's not like your blood levels are much, much higher for the first week and then drop down for the remaining weeks of the cycle when a front end load is used; you simply get up to 'mid-cycle' blood levels faster. This results in, you guessed it, more immediate gains.
Andy
Yes I do have a clue and I understand the concept of frontloading based on steady state depot conc., I was thinking short-term high dose to achieve an immediate blood surge and that longer lasting esters don't cause this, my point was that even an ester with a 5-day half-life still causes an immediate peak in blood conc., after a single inj. Anyhow........
Front loading makes sense particularly if the cycle is relatively short. There are two ways to front load if the goal is to achieve steady state quickly (within the first week). For example, let’s assume someone was going to run a 12 week cycle of enanthate @ 1000 mg per week.
Steady state depot conc would take roughly 5 weeks to achieve, almost 10 weeks for absolute steady state with weekly inj, no front load. Therefore, blood conc are less than optimal for 1000 mg a week dosing until about 5 weeks into the cycle. Steady state conc., assuming a 5-d t½ at 1000 mg/wk would be about 1600 mg. If you want that steady state achieved quickly so blood levels are maximized, there are two ways to do it.
1) Front load with a single 1600 mg dose on day one, then weekly 1000 mg doses.
2) 1000 mg on day 1, 1000 mg on day 4, then 1000 mg on day 10, then weekly 1000 mg doses. This gets you to steady state by day 4.
The difference between the two protocols will likely be the peak conc of test, E2 and DHT in the blood at any given point in time. Some guys on this board seem to have a pretty specific threshold conc. for sides such as gyno and/or prostatitis. I would think there would be less of a surge of DHT and E2 with a tapering inj frequency up front vs a single high dose to front load. Either way, they both work out to the same steady state within the first 4-5 days.
Using the formula in the van der Vies paper, Acta Endocrinol 1985 suppl., if you know the half-life of the AAS you can set up the formula in Excel and figure out what front-load dose/protocol you want to use depending on how variable you want your blood levels to be during a cycle. You can alter steady state by altering inj frequency and/or dose.
W6
Front loading makes sense particularly if the cycle is relatively short. There are two ways to front load if the goal is to achieve steady state quickly (within the first week). For example, let’s assume someone was going to run a 12 week cycle of enanthate @ 1000 mg per week.
Steady state depot conc would take roughly 5 weeks to achieve, almost 10 weeks for absolute steady state with weekly inj, no front load. Therefore, blood conc are less than optimal for 1000 mg a week dosing until about 5 weeks into the cycle. Steady state conc., assuming a 5-d t½ at 1000 mg/wk would be about 1600 mg. If you want that steady state achieved quickly so blood levels are maximized, there are two ways to do it.
1) Front load with a single 1600 mg dose on day one, then weekly 1000 mg doses.
2) 1000 mg on day 1, 1000 mg on day 4, then 1000 mg on day 10, then weekly 1000 mg doses. This gets you to steady state by day 4.
The difference between the two protocols will likely be the peak conc of test, E2 and DHT in the blood at any given point in time. Some guys on this board seem to have a pretty specific threshold conc. for sides such as gyno and/or prostatitis. I would think there would be less of a surge of DHT and E2 with a tapering inj frequency up front vs a single high dose to front load. Either way, they both work out to the same steady state within the first 4-5 days.
Using the formula in the van der Vies paper, Acta Endocrinol 1985 suppl., if you know the half-life of the AAS you can set up the formula in Excel and figure out what front-load dose/protocol you want to use depending on how variable you want your blood levels to be during a cycle. You can alter steady state by altering inj frequency and/or dose.
W6
wilson6 said:
Andy's view poitn may be a little different than mine but frontloading is not the whole concept and cant be properly utilized without taking other techniques into consideration. If you try and frontload by doing a once every 4-5 day or worse a once weekly injection you are setting yourself up for failure. Maybe I am reading your posts wrong, but you views on frontloading (and hell, everyone who argues it for that matter) are used out of context with the "big picture" and in doing so, its easy to see why there is doubt as to its effectivness.
For example when I frontloaded last cycle I shot test and EQ EVERY DAY for the first 2 weeks, not one big injection. There is more too proper frontloading than simply doubleing the dose and calling it good.
Similar threads
