Let's hear Nelson's opinion on NPP...

[manny78]

since there's a big hype lately with nandrolone phenylproprionate (but this stuff has been around for years....), I'd like to know your opinion. I'm sure you already posted on the mighty/unfamous Deca but what about this. I know your answer but this should be an interesting debate

 

[The_Eviscerator]

I would be interested to hear your take as well. I just acquired a crap load of it and plan to use it in my next cycle.

 

[manny78]

I would be interested to hear your take as well. I just acquired a crap load of it and plan to use it in my next cycle.

I'm a fan of deca (not alone but stacked with something else). I believe its among the best mass gainer. For some reasons, docs will prescribe this big time to HIV patients while they're still unsure about anavar or anadrol. But deca is nasty for some and not made for everyone. Now NPP might not be so harsh when recovery comes. Bigandy69 is a big fan of it. For a long cycle, I see the purpose, but not for a 3 weeks. It would put at risk the whole purpose which is fast recovery with no PCT.

 

[The_Eviscerator]

I'm a fan of deca (not alone but stacked with something else). I believe its among the best mass gainer. For some reasons, docs will prescribe this big time to HIV patients while they're still unsure about anavar or anadrol. But deca is nasty for some and not made for everyone. Now NPP might not be so harsh when recovery comes. Bigandy69 is a big fan of it. For a long cycle, I see the purpose, but not for a 3 weeks. It would put at risk the whole purpose which is fast recovery with no PCT.

My body responds really well to deca, but I have never tried NPP. I plan on keeping cycles below 5 weeks from now on... so NPP is the perfect choice for easy PCT. I plan on doing NPP/Test Prop/Masteron.

 

[Nelson Montana]

Any opinion I have will be admittedly academic since I have no personal experience with it -- just access to the same information as everyone else. Going with that, it certainly makes sense that if you want to do nandro, this version will less likely to carry the severity of side effects. But I wouldn't get TOO excited. i.e. Test prop still carries the same sides as test. The drug is the drug.

I also don't think the half life of any drug is that much of a consequence when doing a short cycle. All drugs have a natural taper and if something lasts a few days more or less, it isn't a big deal. The metabolites of Deca may hang around for months but the drug is essentially inert after a couple of weeks.

If Deca works for you, I think NPP is a good choice. To be honest, I got good gains with Deca, but it did bloat me. If it weren't such a dick killer, I'd use it again.

 

[chaquito]

running proviron and test with deca should not give you any dick-problems. so nelson. you dont care if a steroid makes you bloat? is there anything to use agains deca-bloat?

 

[The_Eviscerator]

If Deca works for you, I think NPP is a good choice. To be honest, I got good gains with Deca, but it did bloat me. If it weren't such a dick killer, I'd use it again.

Nelson, I have yet to try it as well, but one of the selling points for me was the reported absence of bloating and the lower inhibition of the HPTA due to faster clearing times.

 

[Nelson Montana]

Nelson, I have yet to try it as well, but one of the selling points for me was the reported absence of bloating and the lower inhibition of the HPTA due to faster clearing times.

Yeah, but the clearing time is irrelevant if you keep administering it.

I don't know why people are so concerned with bloating. I think it started with the guys who'd do a cycle to look good on spring break. Bloating is a part of the building process. It means fluids are bringing nutrients to the muscles, making them stronger, allowing for a better pump. It even stretches the myofasia allowing for more potential growth. Why does everyone want to lose that? If it gets out of hand, throw on a sweatbelt and do circut training and sweat off a quart or two. Take some dandelion and potassium and you piss it right out. It's no big deal. Then again, if you look like a moonface it's time to cut back on the dosages.

 

[The_Eviscerator]

Yeah, but the clearing time is irrelevant if you keep administering it.

True... but if you do a 6 week cycle it is a 6 week cycle... unlike a 6 week being an 8-9 week cycle with nandrolone decanoate.

I don't know why people are so concerned with bloating. I think it started with the guys who'd do a cycle to look good on spring break. Bloating is a part of the building process. It means fluids are bringing nutrients to the muscles, making them stronger, allowing for a better pump. It even stretches the myofasia allowing for more potential growth. Why does everyone want to lose that? If it gets out of hand, throw on a sweatbelt and do circut training and sweat off a quart or two. Take some dandelion and potassium and you piss it right out. It's no big deal. Then again, if you look like a moonface it's time to cut back on the dosages.

bloating isn't a big deal during a bulk cycle, but if you are dieting and you want a harder appearance then NPP should help. Also, if you bloat with NPP... in 3 days it is out of your system.

 

[DrJMW]

Short-acting AAS is always better than long-acting. You get a more controllable level of AAS. Also, typically fewer sides (estrogenic or prolactin), for the drug clears faster than the body can convert or react to it. Both estrogenic sides (from aromatizing AAS) and prolactin sides (from deca, fina, tren, anadrol) are easily controlled.

 

[Nelson Montana]

Short-acting AAS is always better than long-acting. You get a more controllable level of AAS. Also, typically fewer sides (estrogenic or prolactin), for the drug clears faster than the body can convert or react to it. Both estrogenic sides (from aromatizing AAS) and prolactin sides (from deca, fina, tren, anadrol) are easily controlled.

True, but Doc, don't you think the same result can be obtained with smaller, more frequent injections? In other words, 50 mgs of cyp every other day or even three days, will produce a pretty even distribution without rapid peaks and drops. Granted, it's a pain in the ass (no pun intended) but it's do-able. If anything, I find prop can give too much of a kick too fast.

 

[DrJMW]

50mg of test prop EOD will always be more effective and with fewer sides than 50mg test cyp EOD or ETD. Test cyp takes too long to kick in; your levels will never be as high as the same dosing of test prop either...just simple pharmacology.

Another simplier example: In the olden day, docs prescribed 250 mg penicillin every 6 hours for infection. The problem was blood levels never got high enough to kill the bacteria and this dosing created resistant stains. Now, proper prescribing includes a loading dose of 2grams, then 500mg every 6 six hours. This gets the blood levels up quick and keeps them there. Test cyp is a slow and long-acting drug, unlike penicillin. Test prop or suspension is more like penicillin. The theory of loading doses for AAS is still debatable, for the sides of such high initial dosing are still a problem, unlike with penicillin (no sides).

 

[Andy13]

50mg of test prop EOD will always be more effective and with fewer sides than 50mg test cyp EOD or ETD. Test cyp takes too long to kick in; your levels will never be as high as the same dosing of test prop either...just simple pharmacology.
QUOTE]

Shorter esters = less sides ?

I don't believe that to be accurate. But please, let me hear your rational. Here's mine..

In HRT, perfect replacement scheme is one that resembles endogenous T. Nowadays the HRT researchers are all pushing the gel, TU, patch, pellet,.. whatever, anything besides conventional T esters TE and TC. In that world, TE is so passe, one wouldn't dare submit a manuscript to them that advocated TE for HRT.. Anyway, as you probably know, the drug companies are in a race to come out with the most effective, painless, easy, testosterone delivery system. The trend is pretty clear, and intuitive, "more stable blood levels = the better."

There is also a trend in the evolution of HRT drugs..

TP wouldn't even be considered for HRT, while TE is obsolete, TU and T buciclate are the only esters that most (in the know) endocrinologists will prescribe. If I were the doc, I'd prescribe the patch, pellet or gel, before TE too.. There's no comparison in efficacy.. at least for HRT.. Even though it’s HRT, the principle still applys to Bbers. Stable blood levels ARE better. The difference between what we use and HRT is only 1- length of cycle and 2-dose/type of drugs.

There is a pattern here.. shorter esters (TP) give rise to fluctuating blood levels unless they are administered more frequently. Fluctuating blood levels are undesirable and lead to increased increased sides as well as compromised gains. Shorter esters = more fluctuation in blood levels.

There is no scientific reasoning supportive of the argument: “shorter esters = less sides.” Instead, the point “longer esters = less sides” could easily be made with both, mathematical as well as a practical arguments. I’m not saying you are wrong, and shorter esters don’t give YOU less sides.. I’m just saying that it is mathematically, scientifically, without basis.

This is why I prefer TE over TP. Deca and NPP are an exception. In this case, I would take NPP of ND.

By the way, someone mentioned something about the clearing time being irrelevant if you keep administering ND or NPP. The clearing time IS relevant. If you are 2-4-6-8 (any)... weeks into your cycle of 500mg/week of either deca or NPP and stop dosing, NPP will clear your system in a 1-2 weeks. Deca is a different story. No other AAS results in more dead time than deca.. I'm talking about after the cycle when blood levels aren't high enough to continue making gains, yet they aren't even close to being low enough to allow recovery.. a lingering persistance akin to STD.


Andy

 

[Andy13]

50mg of test prop EOD will always be more effective and with fewer sides than 50mg test cyp EOD or ETD. Test cyp takes too long to kick in; your levels will never be as high as the same dosing of test prop either...just simple pharmacology.

Another simplier example: In the olden day, docs prescribed 250 mg penicillin every 6 hours for infection. The problem was blood levels never got high enough to kill the bacteria and this dosing created resistant stains. Now, proper prescribing includes a loading dose of 2grams, then 500mg every 6 six hours. This gets the blood levels up quick and keeps them there. Test cyp is a slow and long-acting drug, unlike penicillin. Test prop or suspension is more like penicillin. The theory of loading doses for AAS is still debatable, for the sides of such high initial dosing are still a problem, unlike with penicillin (no sides).

I understood your analogy, and I agree.. Longer esters DO require more time at constant xmg/week to reach max theraputic blood levels. I'm confused about 'longer esters never reaching the same height as shorter esters.' I'm can only guess that you mean "the cumulative, max theraputic blood concentration of active hormone will be greater for TP than TE (equimolar amounts)"

This is actually an incorrect statement.. TE and TP, at equimolar amounts, WILL infact yield the similar "max therapeutic" mean blood concentrations. By “max theraputic” I am referring to the to the point at which subsequent xmg/week doses no longer appreciably increase cumulative blood levels, instead just maintain.

As you said, TP will peak out first, but TE will infact catch up.. Their mean max blood levels will be essentially the same. There is no reason to snub longer esters like TE for being slow.. This is what the front end load was invented for..

 

[DrJMW]

It's tough to explain without a drawing. Long-acting esters, for a simple example: Inject on Sunday, peak blood level concentration is on Wednesday, and drops down by Saturday. New injection on sunday just repeats the above. Now, use a short-acting ester. Inject EOD or apply Gel daily or ingest daily (sublinguals). Your graph will be smoother. Theoretically, there are no peaks and valleys, just a straight line. Many users have told me that they suffer fewer estrogenic sides using short-acting meds. I still recommend anti-e's if dosing gets above levels where estrogenic problems occurs or if the user has a previous disposition to gyno. Again, sometimes experience outweighs all the "scientific evidence." Unfortunately, most research deosn't include the steroid athlete.

 

[Nelson Montana]

Doc, if you get a chance, PM me. Thanks.

 

[Andy13]

It's tough to explain without a drawing. Long-acting esters, for a simple example: Inject on Sunday, peak blood level concentration is on Wednesday, and drops down by Saturday. New injection on sunday just repeats the above. Now, use a short-acting ester. Inject EOD or apply Gel daily or ingest daily (sublinguals). Your graph will be smoother. Theoretically, there are no peaks and valleys, just a straight line. Many users have told me that they suffer fewer estrogenic sides using short-acting meds. I still recommend anti-e's if dosing gets above levels where estrogenic problems occurs or if the user has a previous disposition to gyno. Again, sometimes experience outweighs all the "scientific evidence." Unfortunately, most research deosn't include the steroid athlete.

I can appreciate what you are saying.. I have looked at more of these graphs than I had ever imagined.. With nandrolone deconate as the exception, ALL esters generally peak inside 24hrs. A single injection from a short ester typically has a taller peak, but steeper slope while the longer ester peaks lower, but is sustained.. The experimental data actually agrees impressively well with the simple exponential decay model.. There are a few exceptions, but, as you said, these are usually non-steroid athelete conditions..

http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/full/84/10/3469/F1

The graphs in this study would give a more accurate picture if the subjectes were hypogonadal so that basal T could be subtracted out.

 

[juicedbeachbum]

50mg of test prop EOD will always be more effective and with fewer sides than 50mg test cyp EOD or ETD. Test cyp takes too long to kick in; your levels will never be as high as the same dosing of test prop either...just simple pharmacology.

I disagree. Since cyp has a longer half-life, it will build up to higher levels in your blood if taken at the same dosage and frequency as prop. It will give you better gains. If you took cyp EOD for 10 weeks, or prop EOD for 10 weeks, cyp would work better. Cyp takes longer to build up, but after it kicks in, it's much better than prop.

 

[DrJMW]

CYP, EOD, would destroy your lipid profile, raise your red blood count to dangerous levels, etc. Keep dosing at a point where your important systems stay in the normal range. Not enough attention is given to this point. BTW, Nelson, I do not PM. Thanks.