Okay I've been messing around with a blood hormone level calculation program and found that with some 'typical' cylces that are used, hormone levels continue to rise over the course of the cycle.
For example if we take the cycle of 500mg enanthate/week for 8 weeks, blood levels go from around 400 mg in week 2 to over 800mg in week 8.
This would perhaps lend strength to the argument of front loading.
Again in our example, lets assume that we front load with 1500 mg and continue the 500 mg/week for weeks 2-8. This leads to a relatively stable blood test level of ~850 mg from week 3 through week 9 and then falling off to under 100 mg after week 14 or so.
Now to the point... is our assumption, that stable hormone levels are a good thing, correct? Or would gradually increasing hormone levels by design actually be better?
Stub
For example if we take the cycle of 500mg enanthate/week for 8 weeks, blood levels go from around 400 mg in week 2 to over 800mg in week 8.
This would perhaps lend strength to the argument of front loading.
Again in our example, lets assume that we front load with 1500 mg and continue the 500 mg/week for weeks 2-8. This leads to a relatively stable blood test level of ~850 mg from week 3 through week 9 and then falling off to under 100 mg after week 14 or so.
Now to the point... is our assumption, that stable hormone levels are a good thing, correct? Or would gradually increasing hormone levels by design actually be better?
Stub

Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 










