Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
PROOF? You Decide.
- Thread starter Nelson Montana
- Start date
Tatyana
Elite Mentor
Ralph_Wiggum said:
If I remember correctly, you have completely transformed your body, and lost loads of fat.
I have seen you giving out great advice and support to others in the diet sections.
Perfect example, who are you going to listen to, someone who has never had to deal with any issues with body fat, or someone who has.
koolkatarbtl said:
this does not belong here--be civil or leave
eddymerckx said:
You can inject it subq with a slin pin if the oil is thin enough, just as you would hcg. I remember reading a study with hrt patients using that method instead of IM but I can't remember where it is. I just remember that the test did get in their systems.
Ralph_Wiggum
New member
Tatyana said:
Well, to be fair, I have not finished my process of transforming. I went from ~21% bodyfat last June to 13.3% as of this morning. I want to get down to either 10% or visible abs, so that means possibly lower than 10 b/c of my fat storage patterns. I want to get there for July 1st, but, we will see what the reality of the fat loss rate is when July 1st rolls around.
I just wanted to be clear on that. I'm not going to lie about my physique, and I am especially not going to be delusional to myself about my status and let my diet slip b/c of it. I still have progress to make and I will not give up until I get there.
I have yo-yo'ed b/w bodyfat levels since I started in this game years ago. I have assimilated a large amount of conflicting information that has set me back in progress, and to be fair, some of the info has helped progress. I have tried Nelson's philosophy of avoiding cardio in the name of retaining/building muscle while staying the same bodyweight to hopefully change my bodyfat percentage. TALK ABOUT LIMBO! If anything, that hurt my progress. I have learned at the cost of wasted time and life energy that Nelson's philosophy on no cardio is DEFINITELY not applicable to me.
For me, I am either building or cutting, and hopefully losing more bodyfat to muscle in the cutting process. I just have to eat clean all the time, never totally eliminate cardio, and hope that my weight gained is mostly muscle and weight lost is mostly fat. Sure, I may not be putting my body in the best environment for high test/thyroid levels through these strategies, but AT LEAST I AM GOING IN A DIRECTION. Whats the point of avoiding cardio to keep muscle and test levels if it keeps you fat?
I have seen one exception to the rule of taking advice from people with good genetics: Tom Venuto. I would recommend to anyone Tom Venuto's "Burn The Fat Feed The Muscle". He takes a MUCH better approach to the whole fitness process, talks about motivations, goals, and lifestyle. He does advocate cardio, lots of it, and it gets results. I mold many of my philosophies from his book.
mus1cjunk1e said:
did they mention how the half life and net absorbed was impacted (i assume longer and less)..but never know?
Ralph_Wiggum said:
There are two points in this post that are erroneous.
First of all, you are assuming my theories are based solely only on personal experience and that is not true. I use myself as an example of someone who practices what he preaches but the conclusions are not entirely personal. I've received hundreds of letters from people who were overweight who had amazing results with my methods. You simply did not follow them correctly or chose not to follow them at all because you were prejudiced against them from the start. At any rate, if you've done well on your own, that's great. But with my methods you would have done at least as well and most probably better.
Secondly, cardio DOES NOT burn more calories than weight training. The weight training I advocate for fat loss with burn FAR MORE fat than jogging or bike riding in the same amount of time. Again, it seems you misunderstood the principles.
I was around 125 6 months after coming off and didnt feel like going through hypogondism for another 6 months to a year in order to recover so I went with TRT. Decision was easy for me.
Im now on 150mg enanthate and 10 days after inject i was 570 and mid level Free about 2.07. Of course I did jerk off twice before my test to maniputate. I was concerned because I had double up before going on vacaion.
Anywya, you not totally shut down but you might as well be because 134 total isnt doing shit for you and youll feel likek a pile of dog poo.
Im sure Nelsons supplements do help with his LH unlike the other poster who had none.
Now myself, Im going to start 25mgs of proviron and 20 to 60mgs winny tabs this week and start my clen as soon as I can get some. I may even do 50mgs clomid ed also.
And Im definately picking up some endo and dermacrin.
Im now on 150mg enanthate and 10 days after inject i was 570 and mid level Free about 2.07. Of course I did jerk off twice before my test to maniputate. I was concerned because I had double up before going on vacaion.
Anywya, you not totally shut down but you might as well be because 134 total isnt doing shit for you and youll feel likek a pile of dog poo.
Im sure Nelsons supplements do help with his LH unlike the other poster who had none.
Now myself, Im going to start 25mgs of proviron and 20 to 60mgs winny tabs this week and start my clen as soon as I can get some. I may even do 50mgs clomid ed also.
And Im definately picking up some endo and dermacrin.
Ralph_Wiggum
New member
Nelson Montana said:
You did a poor job explaining it then. I have done high rep, low rest interval training before. I even did this 5 days per week instead of cardio. I gave it 2 months and it didn't work. I'd like to see documentation or proof that your type of weight training burns more calories than a 9-min mile speed jog for the equivelant amount of time. Every calorie estimator I have ever briefed has listed even "intense" weight training as not even close. Hell, if you could provide the proof, I'd add that type of weight training in addition to the cardio I'm doing.
For now, I will be lifting in the same fashion that I lift while gaining muscle. It is the type that will allow me to keep muscle or gain it, which will benefit me more.
Let me chime in here...
Nelson is correct, weight-training(done properly) is more effective for fat loss than cardio alone.
Cardio ONLY BURNS CALORIES WHILE YOU ARE DOING IT. Weight-training elevates the metabolism for 72 hours. Furthermore, muscle-mass increases the rate of calorie expidenture, so as you build muscle, you inevitably lose fat(if done peroperly)
However, for the serious bodybuilder trying to reach low single BF% digits without LOSING MUSCLE MASS(by restricting calories), LOW-INTENSITY CARDIO is absolutely necessary.
For me, that simply means 25 minutes of WALKING POST WORKOUT. Usually, on a slight incline at about 4 MPH. RUNNING is OFF LIMITS and is simply NOT part of the complex bodybuilding equation.
The ULTIMATE solution for fat-loss is a fully comprehensive program that includes weight-training and LOW-INTENSITY CARDIO.
Nelson is correct, weight-training(done properly) is more effective for fat loss than cardio alone.
Cardio ONLY BURNS CALORIES WHILE YOU ARE DOING IT. Weight-training elevates the metabolism for 72 hours. Furthermore, muscle-mass increases the rate of calorie expidenture, so as you build muscle, you inevitably lose fat(if done peroperly)
However, for the serious bodybuilder trying to reach low single BF% digits without LOSING MUSCLE MASS(by restricting calories), LOW-INTENSITY CARDIO is absolutely necessary.
For me, that simply means 25 minutes of WALKING POST WORKOUT. Usually, on a slight incline at about 4 MPH. RUNNING is OFF LIMITS and is simply NOT part of the complex bodybuilding equation.
The ULTIMATE solution for fat-loss is a fully comprehensive program that includes weight-training and LOW-INTENSITY CARDIO.
Ralph_Wiggum
New member
Ross said:Let me chime in here...
Nelson is correct, weight-training(done properly) is more effective for fat loss than cardio alone.
Cardio ONLY BURNS CALORIES WHILE YOU ARE DOING IT. Weight-training elevates the metabolism for 72 hours. Furthermore, muscle-mass increases the rate of calorie expidenture, so as you build muscle, you inevitably lose fat(if done peroperly)
However, for the serious bodybuilder trying to reach low single BF% digits without LOSING MUSCLE MASS(by restricting calories), LOW-INTENSITY CARDIO is absolutely necessary.
For me, that simply means 25 minutes of WALKING POST WORKOUT. Usually, on a slight incline at about 4 MPH. RUNNING is OFF LIMITS and is simply NOT part of the complex bodybuilding equation.
The ULTIMATE solution for fat-loss is a fully comprehensive program that includes weight-training and LOW-INTENSITY CARDIO.
Don't get me wrong, I have no delusions about which burns more calories after the exercise, but again, there is only so much time per week you can weightlift before you get to the overtraining point. There is also a limit as to how far you can limit calories. To gain more of a calorie deficit per week, adding cardio ( I wish I was lucky like you and get away w/ low intensity) is the option IMO.
I don't buy into the whole 'fat burning zone' theory w/ regards to cardio. If it exists, cool, but all I care about is total calories I burn per week. If it means doing cardio plus Nelson's type of training, then BRING IT ON LETS DO THIS SHIT! I'd be all ears.
Ross said:Let me chime in here...
Nelson is correct, weight-training(done properly) is more effective for fat loss than cardio alone.
Cardio ONLY BURNS CALORIES WHILE YOU ARE DOING IT. Weight-training elevates the metabolism for 72 hours. Furthermore, muscle-mass increases the rate of calorie expidenture, so as you build muscle, you inevitably lose fat(if done peroperly)
However, for the serious bodybuilder trying to reach low single BF% digits without LOSING MUSCLE MASS(by restricting calories), LOW-INTENSITY CARDIO is absolutely necessary.
For me, that simply means 25 minutes of WALKING POST WORKOUT. Usually, on a slight incline at about 4 MPH. RUNNING is OFF LIMITS and is simply NOT part of the complex bodybuilding equation.
The ULTIMATE solution for fat-loss is a fully comprehensive program that includes weight-training and LOW-INTENSITY CARDIO.
you are incorrect-- HI cardio exercises crank up your metabolism long after the workout--but low intensity cardio will not.
Ralph_Wiggum said:
Ok, let me take you to SCHOOL.
The "Fat Burning Zone" is not a THEORY, it's a SCIENTIFIC FACT. This PHYSIOLOGICAL state is conducive to FATLOSS(and potentially, muscle-loss), due to a plethora of biological variables, such as blood glucose level, glycogen stores, insulin sensitivity, cortisol levels and thoroximine levels, just to name a few.
Another Scientific FACT: *The RATE at which you perform cardio will determine the SUBSTRATE YOU USE FOR FUEL.
The higher the intensity, the more calories you burn from stored carbohydrates, and if your glycogen stores are depleted, such as in the morning upon waking or PWO, you start using MUSCLE for FUEL!
The LOWER the intensity, the more calories you burn from adipose tissue(FAT CELLS) and the less calories you burn from stores carbohydrates and muscle.
If you wake up in the morning on an empty stomach and do sprints, you will LOSE MUSCLE. If you start running around and playing basketball after a workout, you will LOSE MUSCLE. These are physiological facts.
Performing LOW INTENSITY CARDIO directly after your workout or in the morning on an empty stomach will allow you to utilize FAT for fuel, while protecting your precious muscles(and even AIDING in growth!). If you are not performing low-intensity cardio at least three times a week while CUTTING, you need to go back to SQUARE 1 my friend...
*Note: LOW INTENSITY CARDIO = walking uphill, slight jog(able to converse), very moderate boxing, or swimming in a pool.
Last edited:
eddymerckx said:
YES, HIT *CARDIO will crank up your metabolism, running and jogging will NOT!!!
Weight lifting will also "crank up your metabolism".
Furthermore, HIT CARDIO must be treated(physiologically) just like a normal WORKOUT, so it must NOT be performed in a calorie defecit.
How we got into this debate, I don;t know, but it seems we're spiltting somantic hairs.
First of all EVERYTHING can be considered cardio. If it makes your heart pump faster it's cardio.
Now running sprints is not what people think of as AEROBIC exercise. So what are we really talking about here? Sure, I walk a lot, ride bike, run to catch a bus, jog across the street, play handball etc, etc. But I do not consider this a part of my training, just an active lifestyle. There's no way of gauging how effective "cardio" is when you're weight training and doing other activities.
I give numerous examples of why weight training is superior to aerobics in my book. I don't do the "cut and paste " thing every time someone screams for statistics they may find satisfactory. Cardio is a less effective form of exercise so saying that you have limited time just makes my argument stronger. Sorry if Wiggum thinks I did a poor job explaining it. Thousands of other people didn't think so. You can't make everyone happy.
First of all EVERYTHING can be considered cardio. If it makes your heart pump faster it's cardio.
Now running sprints is not what people think of as AEROBIC exercise. So what are we really talking about here? Sure, I walk a lot, ride bike, run to catch a bus, jog across the street, play handball etc, etc. But I do not consider this a part of my training, just an active lifestyle. There's no way of gauging how effective "cardio" is when you're weight training and doing other activities.
I give numerous examples of why weight training is superior to aerobics in my book. I don't do the "cut and paste " thing every time someone screams for statistics they may find satisfactory. Cardio is a less effective form of exercise so saying that you have limited time just makes my argument stronger. Sorry if Wiggum thinks I did a poor job explaining it. Thousands of other people didn't think so. You can't make everyone happy.
Regardless of some of the points made in this thread--I have treated and will continue to treat what Nelson writes as correct until proven otherwise.
his experience and achievements suggest that unless you have a solid, reasoned, and researched argument, backed-up with appropriate substantive scholarly support---and not just “bro-ology”, you should sit back and learn—not offer straw arguments or split fine semantic hairs.
his experience and achievements suggest that unless you have a solid, reasoned, and researched argument, backed-up with appropriate substantive scholarly support---and not just “bro-ology”, you should sit back and learn—not offer straw arguments or split fine semantic hairs.
Ross said:Let me chime in here...
Nelson is correct, weight-training(done properly) is more effective for fat loss than cardio alone.
Cardio ONLY BURNS CALORIES WHILE YOU ARE DOING IT. Weight-training elevates the metabolism for 72 hours. Furthermore, muscle-mass increases the rate of calorie expidenture, so as you build muscle, you inevitably lose fat(if done peroperly)
However, for the serious bodybuilder trying to reach low single BF% digits without LOSING MUSCLE MASS(by restricting calories), LOW-INTENSITY CARDIO is absolutely necessary.
For me, that simply means 25 minutes of WALKING POST WORKOUT. Usually, on a slight incline at about 4 MPH. RUNNING is OFF LIMITS and is simply NOT part of the complex bodybuilding equation.
The ULTIMATE solution for fat-loss is a fully comprehensive program that includes weight-training and LOW-INTENSITY CARDIO.
I prefer a balance of overall fitness and weights / active lifestyle as compared to counting 500 burnt calories as lost muscle building opportunities.
This has been a very interesting thread. I did'nt realize all these topics could be so over analyzed just for the sake of trying to find out who's wrong.
Much of the discussion exceeds the every day life of many guys here including me.
chazk
New member
Simple solution to get cardio benifits during weight training. Take short rest between sets. Go all out during each rep. Stop yacking in the gym and lift . Yes your heart rate will be elevated the entire time.
Do this just even 3 times a week you have done weight training and cardio together.
Prob is alot of guys want to loose fat way to fast . They bulk all winter and want to shed it off in 4 weeks. When all they have to do is just lower the rest time between sets and keep moving in the gym with full intensity and the fat will come off with a clean diet that is
Do this just even 3 times a week you have done weight training and cardio together.
Prob is alot of guys want to loose fat way to fast . They bulk all winter and want to shed it off in 4 weeks. When all they have to do is just lower the rest time between sets and keep moving in the gym with full intensity and the fat will come off with a clean diet that is
Tatyana
Elite Mentor
Ross said:Let me chime in here...
Nelson is correct, weight-training(done properly) is more effective for fat loss than cardio alone.
Cardio ONLY BURNS CALORIES WHILE YOU ARE DOING IT. Weight-training elevates the metabolism for 72 hours. Furthermore, muscle-mass increases the rate of calorie expidenture, so as you build muscle, you inevitably lose fat(if done peroperly)
However, for the serious bodybuilder trying to reach low single BF% digits without LOSING MUSCLE MASS(by restricting calories), LOW-INTENSITY CARDIO is absolutely necessary.
For me, that simply means 25 minutes of WALKING POST WORKOUT. Usually, on a slight incline at about 4 MPH. RUNNING is OFF LIMITS and is simply NOT part of the complex bodybuilding equation.
The ULTIMATE solution for fat-loss is a fully comprehensive program that includes weight-training and LOW-INTENSITY CARDIO.
Read that as competitive bodybuilder, which really doesn't apply to a lot of the peeps on this board.
I also request that all the bold claims about scientific FACTS are being stated when I assert:
- you do not have a scientific background, unclear about how to properly use the scientific method (therefore what is a legitmate bit of research or not)
- the research is conflicting
- there are genetic/biochemical/physiological variations in the human population that will NEVER have it be one way or the other. (see above point)
This is a gross oversimplification, but there are people who are 'fast' oxidisers and people who are 'slow' oxidisers.
There are enough people who are hostile towards science and the academic community, in particular, this is a trend in the US, and statements and marketing methods such as this contribute to it.
Tatyana
Elite Mentor
ceo said:You mean there's no, "one size fits all" training and diet program????
lololo...thank you Tatyana. It seems some people here seem to forget that.
I do love 'rules of thumb', it is a good starting place, but bodybuilding is really a lot more like conducting an experiment on yourself.
Anyone with even a basic scientific education would know that the really interesting similarity/diversity of humans (we are all the same but we are different) would mean that one size does not fit all.
I could bring out papers supporting this (and explain it in a way that people would 'get it', not blind them with science) with things like the difference in the daily requirements for vitamins and minerals.
HUGE variation.
nzrodney said:
That's exactly one of the pleasant side effects of using UNLEASHED.
eddymerckx said:
I don't remember any specific numbers but I know they were HRT patients that went from IM injects to subq and their total/free test numbers basically stayed the same after the swap. So obviously it was getting into their blood. Sorry I can't remember more or find a link, it was a while ago.
mus1cjunk1e said:
I would never do subQ of oil, but it does prove that you only need a 1" pin.
funkyfresh
New member
Have to say guys, this is a great post. I don't really write too much on these boards, but I'm always learning from these kind of debates.
Think Nelson, Ross, Tatyana..etc. have all brought some great points to this. Respect all you guys.
However I think the Tatyana has pretty much said it all.
This says it all....and to me that is exactly what I like so much about Bodybuilding. It's a constant learning curve.
Think Nelson, Ross, Tatyana..etc. have all brought some great points to this. Respect all you guys.
However I think the Tatyana has pretty much said it all.
This says it all....and to me that is exactly what I like so much about Bodybuilding. It's a constant learning curve.
njmuscleguy
New member
nzrodney said:
Not sure what the point you're trying to make? Do you mean if you get morning wood while on HRT that suggests you're not shut down? Or off HRT?
If you're on HRT, and your natural test production is shut down, you'll still get morning wood compliments of the exogenous test.
Conversely, if you don't get morning wood, and you're not on HRT.... that doesn't mean you're shut down necessarily....only that your natural test levels are likely low.
njmuscleguy said:
Damn I haven't gotten morning wood very often for years, even before cycling. That's probably bad as I'm only 22. I had a long period of very high stress about 2 years ago tho and it def killed my sex drive during that time. I don't think I've ever been the same after that. I think when I fully recover from my cycle I'm going to go get my test levels checked and see where I stand. I would hate to be an HRT patient at 22.
Interestingly enough the only time recently that I did get strong morning wood when I was on a low dose test/tren/mast cycle and took unleashed for a couple days. I guess that says something about it.
mus1cjunk1e said:
And there ya go.
Nelson Montana said:And there ya go.
Ya on that cycle I only had morning wood the couple days I took the unleashed. I stopped taking it though because I was getting pinched nerves in my sleep that started right when I started taking it so I associated the two. However I used unleashed during my pct and didn't get any pinched nerves so it was just a coincidence. I have a little left so I want to take it for a few days now that I feel 95% recovered and see what it does for me.
Tatyana
Elite Mentor
Ralph_Wiggum said:
I was thinking about what you posted about losing body fat.
I don't always make this really public, but I had to take off close to 50lbs of 'immigration weight' when I first moved to England, and got FAT.
I think if you have more of an 'endo' tendency, then cardio is necessary to take off fat.
However, once you are at an athletic body fat (for men, probably anything under 10-12%), then it is easy to maintain with weights only, as long as your diet is reasonable.
There is also this other theory that has been kicking around a few science/physiology journals about homeostasis, and a 'set' body weight (and probably body composition).
Most of our history has been humans surviving. All our modern conveniences are just that, really new to our physiology.
Think about the last time you went camping, or had to spend a lot of time outside, exposed to the elements.
Then think about having to do that day after day, month after month, year after year, and having to catch all your food.
Our bodies are designed to survive, and survival to the body is fat, keeping things the same.
When things change too rapidly, weight, the body wants to return to the state it knew that it could survive in.
There have been some times thrown around, that you would have to maintain a new bodyweight for 9-18 months for it to 're-set' at that weight.
This also applies to gaining muscle, as muscle is really metabolically demanding, and also throws off the 'survival homeostasis'.
My take on this is anytime you want to transform your body, it is all about seducing and tricking the body into doing what you want it to do, not raping it to change it.
This also needs to be taken with a grain of salt as well, as we can handle a lot of stressors, and every now and then hammering yourself is good to mix it up.
ceo said:
You forgot that they also only bang 11's and all drive bentleys that they keep at their summer homes.
muscleup said:
LOL me too
can't wait for my friggin tax return if I even get anything back
Tatyana
Elite Mentor
ceo said:
I have a biochem background.
B Sc Biology (that was more evolutionary and ecology, but I did take chemistry, physics, cell biology, biochem)
B Sc Biomedical Sciences - first class honours degree and the President's Prize cause I was such a girlie swot. This degree was a lot of biochem, genetics, haematology, microbiology
Right now I am finishing off my M Sc in clinical biochemistry. I have finished and passed the taught part, now just my research project to complete.
Almost there!!!!!
Also probably more than 10 years of lab experience in total, in research and medical labs.
njmuscleguy
New member
mus1cjunk1e said:
You should definitely get that checked out once you're FULLY recovered from your cycle. How's your libido otherwise? erections (not to get personal)... if any of those are "lacking", then those are sure signs your natty test levels are lower than normal for your age. Hell, if you have to go on HRT, even at 22, DO IT! Do you honestly want to drudge through 10 years before saying "F-k it, I've had enough of feeling like crap every day!" I wish I had learned years ago about HRT (and I'm only 33)!
By the way, I'm sure the reason you're getting wood on that cycle is probably cuz of the test and mast... sure, Unleashed helps too.
Nah what I meant was that the only days on that cycle that I got morning wood were the couple days I used unleashed. Then when I came off and did pct using unleashed, no more morning wood probably because of low test levels -- too low even for unleashed to make my free test high enough for that.njmuscleguy said:
njmuscleguy said:
I do plan on having my levels checked. I want to wait at least 6 months to do it though. I feel 95% recovered now but I want to make sure I'm back to normal before getting tested.
My libido is ok but it hasn't really been super high since I was 17 or 18 or so. But even then I don't think it was as high as most people but thats a really hard thing to judge. I have a lot of the symptoms like tired all the time, sometimes depressed, etc. But I need other things checked first. I get really bad sleep pretty much all the time (wake up at least once a night sometimes a couple times, dont feel rested in the morning ever) so I really need to get my sleep patterns checked first. Can getting bad sleep affect test levels?
Also its hard to tell what exactly "depression" is, I mean everyone feels down sometimes. Plus I have always had an anxiety disorder my whole life so that contributes a lot to it. I know stress can lower test levels and I have lots of added stress from the anxiety and also most of my depression I think stems from that too but its hard to say. So I feel like there could be many factors.
But should a 21yo/22yo be getting morning wood every day? The last time I got it all the time had to be when I was 17 or 18. Maybe even 19 but its hard to remember. I know 18yo is basically the peak for male sex drive but I don't think its supposed to dive down that hard that fast.
There was a 6 month period where I was under a lot of stress (cant really talk about it) but that KILLED my sex drive. Imagine having a girlfriend that loves to fuck all the time, and I'm the one that doesn't want to. It fuckin sucked. Part of that was that I wasn't very physically attracted to her, but overall my libido was really low at that time. I had problems keeping it up when I was fuckin her. But like I said I wasn't really physically attracted to her so that had a LOT to do with it. But I didn't really want sex at all during that time, not even just from her. I never felt like my libido came back 100% after that.
Also its always been hard for me to gain muscle and its been hard for me to loose fat both of which I know can have to do with low test levels, but I don't know how much of that is just because I didn't know proper diet and training. The next 6 months should clear that up for me though as I know more now than I ever did.
njmuscleguy
New member
mus1cjunk1e said:
Those are all indicators of low natural test levels.... and yes, being sleep-deprived LOWERS your test levels...but lower test levels also causes poor sleep habits... it's a viscious cycle... in the next few months, clean up your diet, make a conscious effort to sleep more / better, and see what happens...if little or no improvement, you have your answer! (my guess is HRT will be in order)
njmuscleguy said:
I'm gonna give it a shot. I've got my diet in total check now, have for a few months but I'm refining it more and more. Also I've been trying new lifting routines and added cardio to help burn fat. I always thought I was a total ecto but I think I may be half ecto half endo (heh worst of both worlds, small joints and hard gainer but gain fat easily haha). Also I am currently Wulfgars top choice for a natty person to train for 2 months so we'll see what he can do with me if he ends up picking me. Either way I'm getting my total/free test levels checked in about 6 months just to be sure.
I should probably also mention that I've never really been an aggressive person either and I know higher test levels are associated with being more aggressive (and I'm not talking about roid rage). But once again that can be attributed to having social anxiety for years (makes you pretty passive).
Either way it's a pointless discussion until I actually get my levels checked, so we'll see.
Either way it's a pointless discussion until I actually get my levels checked, so we'll see.
needtogetaas
New member
bump
CHEESE 'N CRACKERS! THAT WAS FUN! CASE SOL-VED! Now STFU and go lift!
jroc86
New member
Ross said:Nelson, you were on 100mgs of TESTOSTERONE, which is why you tested at almost 900ng/dl.
You ARE SHUTDOWN, try coming OFF and see what your level is...
This is the answer right here. The median test production is approx 70mg/week ... considering your doing HRT with a little bit more than the aforemntioned #, obviously your going to test high.
Go off, and get back to us bro.
TBH Im very disapointed with what an advertising campaign this entire board has become in a year, and am choked at myself for starting a new account and getting a plat. Fuck me, every second thread in the AAS board (not supplement board) is plugging some state of the art miracle drug.
jroc86 said:
It's already been established that there are those on as much and more T and have a lower total and free %. So the whole "shutdown" theory is proven incorrect.
Try to pay attention to what is being said instead of complaining about too much advertising.
One thing about the EF board; even if a sponsor sucks, the members will say so. But if a sponsor has some good stuff that works for people , why be eager to dismiss it ? Just because you don't like advertising and feel like complaining about it? That's just silly and self defeating bro.
needtogetaas
New member
trueNelson Montana said:
I've tried to come off of HRT numerous times over the past 5 years. My most recent attempt was after being on Test Cyp 100mg/week for about 9 months. I stopped it and immediately started talking Nolvadex 40mg ED.
I got my blood levels tested at the 1 week mark and about fell out of my chair.
Total Testosterone = 93 (range = 241 to 827)
Everything else was in the toilet, too. DHT, Estradiol, LH, etc...all super low. During the whole 9 months, LH hovered around zero (a clear indicator of full HPTA suppression). Thinking that the results were a mistake, I got immediately retested. It came back in the low 100's. WTF?? I was really scared, but over the course of the next 8 weeks, the Nolvadex did bring levels back up and then I tapered off of that.
However, for that period of "cold turkey" between the two, I basically had zero endogenous Testosterone production.
R1
I got my blood levels tested at the 1 week mark and about fell out of my chair.
Total Testosterone = 93 (range = 241 to 827)
Everything else was in the toilet, too. DHT, Estradiol, LH, etc...all super low. During the whole 9 months, LH hovered around zero (a clear indicator of full HPTA suppression). Thinking that the results were a mistake, I got immediately retested. It came back in the low 100's. WTF?? I was really scared, but over the course of the next 8 weeks, the Nolvadex did bring levels back up and then I tapered off of that.
However, for that period of "cold turkey" between the two, I basically had zero endogenous Testosterone production.
R1
DJLegacy2k1
New member
Add some DERMACRINE in, might help
-Legacy
-Legacy
r1 said:
I would question whether the Nolva had anything to do with it.
BBBBig Phenom
New member
wow
Nelson Montana said:
I've wondered the same. However, I'm convinced that it is a response to Nolva. On 40mg, I got my Test levels back into the 600's with LH around 11.
As I tapered off, my Test levels steadily dropped and settled in the low 200's with no Nolva.
I do believe that you are fully suppressed, Nelson. Question is...who cares? I mean shit, if it works, it works. I respect the fact that you've been able to make TRT work for you for such a long time. For many people, it is a constant struggle and lots of chasing your tail in circles.
R1
