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

Re-Post Clomid -vs- Nolvadex By W. Lleweylln

lawnsaver

New member
Clomid, Nolvadex and Testosterone Stimulation
By William Llewellyn


I have received a lot of heat lately about my preference for Nolvadex over Clomid, which I hold for all purposes of use (in the bodybuilding world anyway); as an anti-estrogen, an HDL (good) cholesterol-supporting drug, and as a testosterone-stimulating compound. Most people use Nolvadex to combat gynecomastia over Clomid anyway, so that is an easy sell. And for cholesterol, well, most bodybuilders unfortunately pay little attention to this important issue, so by way of disinterest, another easy opinion to discuss. But when it comes to using Nolvadex for increasing endogenous testosterone release, bodybuilders just do not want to hear it. They only seem to want Clomid. I can only guess that this is based on a long rooted misunderstanding of the actions of the two drugs. In this article I would therefore like to discuss the specifics for these two agents, and explain clearly the usefulness of Nolvadex for the specific purpose of increasing testosterone production.



Clomid and Nolvadex

I am not sure how Clomid and Nolvadex became so separated in the minds of bodybuilders. They certainly should not be. Clomid and Nolvadex are both anti-estrogens belonging to the same group of triphenylethylene compounds. They are structurally related and specifically classified as selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) with mixed agonistic and antagonistic properties. This means that in certain tissues they can block the effects of estrogen, by altering the binding capacity of the receptor, while in others they can act as actual estrogens, activating the receptor. In men, both of these drugs act as anti-estrogens in their capacity to oppose the negative feedback of estrogens on the hypothalamus and stimulate the heightened release of GnRH (Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone). LH output by the pituitary will be increased as a result, which in turn can increase the level of testosterone by the testes. Both drugs do this, but for some reason bodybuilders persist in thinking that Clomid is the only drug good at stimulating testosterone. What you will find with a little investigation however is that not only is Nolvadex useful for the same purpose, it should actually be the preferred agent of the two.

Studies conducted in the late 1970's at the University of Ghent in Belgium make clear the advantages of using Nolvadex instead of Clomid for increasing testosterone levels (1). Here, researchers looked the effects of Nolvadex and Clomid on the endocrine profiles of normal men, as well as those suffering from low sperm counts (oligospermia). For our purposes, the results of these drugs on hormonally normal men are obviously the most relevant. What was found, just in the early parts of the study, was quite enlightening. Nolvadex, used for 10 days at a dosage of 20mg daily, increased serum testosterone levels to 142% of baseline, which was on par with the effect of 150mg of Clomid daily for the same duration (the testosterone increase was slightly, but not significantly, better for Clomid). We must remember though that this is the effect of three 50mg tablets of Clomid. With the price of both a 50mg Clomid and 20mg Nolvadex typically very similar, we are already seeing a cost vs. results discrepancy forming that strongly favors the Nolvadex side.



Pituitary Sensitivity to GnRH

But something more interesting is happening. Researchers were also conducting GnRH stimulation tests before and after various points of treatment with Nolvadex and Clomid, and the two drugs had markedly different results. These tests involved infusing patients with 100mcg of GnRH and measuring the output of pituitary LH in response. The focus of this test is to see how sensitive the pituitary is to Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone. The more sensitive the pituitary, the more LH will be released. The tests showed that after ten days of treatment with Nolvadex, pituitary sensitivity to GnRH increased slightly compared to pre-treated values. This is contrast to 10 days of treatment with 150mg Clomid, which was shown to consistently DECREASE pituitary sensitivity to GnRH (more LH was released before treatment). As the study with Nolvadex progresses to 6 weeks, pituitary sensitivity to GnRH was significantly higher than pre-treated or 10-day levels. At this point the same 20mg dosage was also raising testosterone and LH levels to an average of 183% and 172% of base values, respectively, which again is measurably higher than what was noted 10 days into therapy. Within 10 days of treatment Clomid is already exerting an effect that is causing the pituitary to become slightly desensitized to GnRH, while prolonged use of Nolvadex serves only to increase pituitary sensitivity to this hormone. That is not to say Clomid won't increase testosterone if taken for the same 6 week time period. Quite the opposite is true. But we are, however, noticing an advantage in Nolvadex.



The Estrogen Clomid

The above discrepancies are likely explained by differences in the estrogenic nature of the two compounds. The researchers' clearly support this theory when commenting in their paper, "The difference in response might be attributable to the weak intrinsic estrogenic effect of Clomid, which in this study manifested itself by an increase in transcortin and testosterone/estradiol-binding globulin [SHBG] levels; this increase was not observed after tamoxifen treatment". In reviewing other theories later in the paper, such as interference by increased androgen or estrogen levels, they persist in noting that increases in these hormones were similar with both drug treatments, and state that," …a role of the intrinsic estrogenic activity of Clomid which is practically absent in Tamoxifen seems the most probable explanation".

Although these two are related anti-estrogens, they appear to act very differently at different sites of action. Nolvadex seems to be strongly anti-estrogenic at both the hypothalamus and pituitary, which is in contrast to Clomid, which although a strong anti-estrogen at the hypothalamus, seems to exhibit weak estrogenic activity at the pituitary. To find further support for this we can look at an in-vitro animal study published in the American Journal of Physiology in February 1981 (2). This paper looks at the effects of Clomid and Nolvadex on the GnRH stimulated release of LH from cultured rat pituitary cells. In this paper, it was noted that incubating cells with Clomid had a direct estrogenic effect on cultured pituitary cell sensitivity, exerting a weaker but still significant effect compared to estradiol. Nolvadex on the other hand did not have any significant effect on LH response. Furthermore it mildly blocked the effects of estrogen when both were incubated in the same culture.



Conclusion

To summarize the above research succinctly, Nolvadex is the more purely anti-estrogenic of the two drugs, at least where the HPTA (Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Testicular Axis) is concerned. This fact enables Nolvadex to offer the male bodybuilder certain advantages over Clomid. This is especially true at times when we are looking to restore a balanced HPTA, and would not want to desensitize the pituitary to GnRH. This could perhaps slow recovery to some extent, as the pituitary would require higher amounts of hypothalamic GnRH in the presence of Clomid in order to get the same level of LH stimulation.

Nolvadex also seems preferred from long-term use, for those who find anti-estrogens effective enough at raising testosterone levels to warrant using as anabolics. Here Nolvadex would seem to provide a better and more stable increase in testosterone levels, and likely will offer a similar or greater effect than Clomid for considerably less money. The potential rise in SHBG levels with Clomid, supported by other research (3), is also cause for concern, as this might work to allow for comparably less free active testosterone compared to Nolvadex as well. Ultimately both drugs are effective anti-estrogens for the prevention of gyno and elevation of endogenous testosterone, however the above research provides enough evidence for me to choose Nolvadex every time.

In next month's follow-up article I will be discussing the role anti-estrogens play in post-cycle testosterone recovery. Most specifically, I will be detailing what a proper post-cycle ancillary drug program looks like, and explain why anti-estrogens alone are not effective during this window of time.


References
1. Hormonal effects of an antiestrogen, tamoxifen, in normal and oligospermic men. Vermeulen, Comhaire. Fertil and Steril 29 (1978) 320-7

2. Disparate effect of clomiphene and tamoxifen on pituitary gonadotropin release in vitro. Adashi EY, Hsueh AJ, Bambino TH, Yen SS. Am J Physiol 1981 Feb;240(2):E125-30

3. The effect of clomiphene citrate on sex hormone binding globulin in normospermic and oligozoospermic men. Adamopoulos, Kapolla et al. Int J Androl 4 (1981) 639-45
_________________
 
In next month's follow-up article I will be discussing the role anti-estrogens play in post-cycle testosterone recovery. Most specifically, I will be detailing what a proper post-cycle ancillary drug program looks like, and explain why anti-estrogens alone are not effective during this window of time.

My fault. Your post was a re-post. I will find it. Thanks!
 
Back and forth. Back and forth.

For every study that shows Clomid and/or Nolvadex increses LH (and I've read plenty) there's one that shows it lowers LH (and I've read plenty) One study shows it lowers estrogen. Another one shows it might raise it. A study conducted at one University siggests it raises SHBG, while a University accros town says it lowers it.

This all goes to proves one thing...nobody knows shit.

Clomid and Nolvadex are so alike in structure and effect they can almost be considered the same thing. When it comes to reducing estrogen in men they're both very unpredictable.

I do think that it's interesting that Llwellin mentions post anti-e threpy may not be a good idea.

I'll retiterate my belief that estrogen reduction is a waste of time, 9 times out of 10 and will always have a negative effect on gains. (And lipid profiles, and skin tone, and libido).

Using an anti-e is like mopping up excess gasoline that spills from your tank when overfilling it. Just fill it to the top and you won't need the mop.
 
I believe an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

First, I wouldn't take anything that instigated gyno -- or at least not so high of a dosage that it would cause me problems. Most people treat testosterone like it will inflict immediate gyno, but it's not that bad at reasonable dosages or if it's administered properly, i.e in smaller divided doses. (Sus hardly ever causes gyno unless the dosages are stupid) If you're really suseptable to it, throw in some Provron. That's all you should need.

Post cycle? Time. Let your body normalize. All this shit just delays the inevitable. If you stayed on too long and you have no nuts, HCG is the way to go -- again, in small divided dosages. But it isn't a cure -- more of a cosmetic remedy than anything else.
 
From Testosterone Mag. Issue ?
NN

The issue of Clomid vs. Nolvadex is a similar story, as there are positives and negatives on both sides. As an anti-estrogen, there's not really a lot of factors supporting the use of one over another, but Nolvadex seems to have less negative impact on the body (liver function) when used long-term. For this reason, when I choose an anti-estrogen for use during a course, I tend to favour Nolvadex. If I am looking to use one during short cycles or periods after or between cycles, I go with Clomid, as it appears to be slightly better at restoring normal gonadal function.
 
Nelson Montana said:
I believe an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

First, I wouldn't take anything that instigated gyno -- or at least not so high of a dosage that it would cause me problems. Most people treat testosterone like it will inflict immediate gyno, but it's not that bad at reasonable dosages or if it's administered properly, i.e in smaller divided doses. (Sus hardly ever causes gyno unless the dosages are stupid) If you're really suseptable to it, throw in some Provron. That's all you should need.

Post cycle? Time. Let your body normalize. All this shit just delays the inevitable. If you stayed on too long and you have no nuts, HCG is the way to go -- again, in small divided dosages. But it isn't a cure -- more of a cosmetic remedy than anything else.


Nelson...let me get this straight. You dont use anything to restart your HTPA?? I did that 1 time and I crashed so hard! I use a combo of HCG/N-dex while the gear is clearing to revert atrophy, and hit clomid for 3 weeks following the Gear and HCG clearing my system and I dont crash anymore. I usually dont miss a beat sexually and I dont lose my gains.

Nelson, I think you are one of our most knowledgable members, but come on now! Some newbies are going to read this and say, " Hey, I dont need clomid post cycle." I think that is wrong. There is too much scientific data, and real world experience backing the use of clomid. How can so much info be wrong?

Its not...Clomid works! It works for me and 99% of the members here that take it post cycle.

There is nothing you can say to make me believe we will recover as fast without the use of clomid.
 
some peopel say they use nolva for bf reduction and some say to boost test levels
 
LS: I can't comment on why you crashed because I don't know what you did. Obviously, it wasn't a good approach.

Clomid does not help 99% of the people who take it. Some guys use it for up to 6 weeks post cycle. You'd recover naturally bythen anayway. It also makes the condition much worse for some guys.

It's a fallacy that it jump starts the HPTA. The HPTA must work on it's own sooner or later. If anything is helping you now it's the HCG. And besides, Proviron works better than Clomid.

Why does everyone use it? Because they think they have to. It's what the "gurus" say. Tell me this....what did everyone do before Clomid was available? I'll tell you one thing: They didn't get gyno . They recouped just fine. You have to learn to make the most of your cycles. Guys do it wrong then try and fix it on the other end with anti-e's. Do it right and you don't need them. Arnold, Sergio, Scott, Zane, Pearl, Ferrigno, Mentzer, Dickerson, Nubret and Draper didn't use them and they looked pretty good. So why do you need them ? Have you eclipsed the muscularity of these guys?

Trust me bro. More people would be better off without them -- but they have to learn what they're doing. Anti-e's are just a band aid for a wound you shouldn't get in the first place.
 
It seems like Nelson Montana disagrees with lots of steroid gurus. He is knowledgeable on the subject of steroids, but I've found him wrong on several occasions in regard to steroid topics of discussion. He once said that no one should do steroids for longer than 3 weeks for a cycle. And another time, he said that humans shouldn't use vet steroids. Bullshit! One can do a straight 8 week cycle and be fine with minimal sides and good recovery. And vet steroids can be used by humans with excellent results and few problems.

Nelson, you need to go back to Steroids # 101 and educate yourself again. You're behind the times and stuck in the past! Clomid works wonders for restoring one's natural testosterone levels and helps prevent that terrible crash that people experience when they don't use it or Nolvadex for after-cycle therapy.

NN:D
 
Last edited:
NN: You're wrong. First off, I recomened 3 week cycles but I never said they're all that works.

Behind the times? What? Do you think Clomid is a new designer drug I never heard of? You got it backward bro. You still believe the concepts that began in the 80's.

And as far as steroid "gurus" go, I have met, spoken to, and worked with many of them, and can say in all honesty that the ones who aren't complete morons I can count on one hand with a few figers left over. And even someone like Dan, who was brilliant, was often wrong.

And just as an aside, back when I was writting interviews with pro bodybuilders the topic of juice invariably came up. Most of them were pretty cool about it. One consistancy was the fact that none of them took fina. Food for thought.

I've said this before but it bears repeating. Most of the people come on this board, not to learn, but to have their own beliefs confirmed. Tell them something that goes against that belief and they get defensive, even antagonistic. It's human nature I guess. I offer the examples of the old timers not to suggest that you "do it like they did in my day sonny", but as an example, and proof of what I'm saying. You can open your mind or you can huddle with the others who believe the world is flat. Your choice.
 
Last edited:
Nelson Montana said:
One consistancy was the fact that none of them took fina. Food for thought.

This is very true. In my own experience working with, and consulting, many top Pro's including Bob Weatherill, Henderson Thorne, Claude Groulx, Jason Marcovici and Ray Williams, I have never seen nor recommended the use of tren.

Even when Trenbolone (FinaJet) was available in the 80's, the athletes were not using it.
 
Nelson Montana said:
NN: You're wrong. First off, I recomened 3 week cycles but I never said they're all that works.

Behind the times? What? Do you think Clomid is a new designer drug I never heard of? You got it backward bro. You still believe the concepts that began in the 80's.

And as far as steroid "gurus" go, I have met, spoken to, and worked with many of them, and can say in all honesty that the ones who aren't complete morons I can count on one hand with a few figers left over. And even someone like Dan, who was brilliant, was often wrong.

And just as an aside, back when I was writting interviews with pro bodybuilders the topic of juice invariably came up. Most of them were pretty cool about it. One consistancy was the fact that none of them took fina. Food for thought.

I've said this before but it bears repeating. Most of the people come on this board, not to learn, but to have their own beliefs confirmed. Tell them something that goes against that belief and they get defensive, even antagonistic. It's human nature I guess. I offer the examples of the old timers not to suggest that you "do it like they did in my day sonny", but as an example, and proof of what I'm saying. You can open your mind or you can huddle with the others who believe the world is flat. Your choice.

Nelson, I just cant swallow this. The cycle in which I crashed from was just a test GH cycle. I have never used tren, but used deca. I found it very hard to come back from that.

So all the studies that say clomid and nolvadex stimulates the HPTA to restart is bogus?? I know it works, as i have used it with great success. How can so many people be wrong, how can so many people get such a great pecebo effect?
 
Lawnsaver:So all the studies that say clomid and nolvadex stimulates the HPTA to restart is bogus??

I don't mean to put words in Nelson's mouth, but, it seems to me like he's saying that they just keep the HPTA in check while you're taking a certain anti-e. Nelson, IF thats what your saying, then what would be the problem w/ taking novla or clmid for 6 weeks until your HPTA naturally comes back(that was the time frame you suggested earlier). Also, i don't quite understand your ideas for post-cycle therapy. Do you mean to take low doses of steroids and proviron on-cycle, and nothing post? Or do you mean to take proviron post-low dose cycle.
 
LS: The reason for your crash was the deca -- no doubt.

HIM:Yes, you're right. But even though clomid stimulates the HPTA -- IN SOME PEOPLE (in others it supresses it) sooner or later you need to take over on your own. In 6 weeks you'd be back anyway. Plus, and I say this the 100,000000000th time, estrogen is necessary for growth and libido.

I'd use proviron during the cycle only if I were super prone to gyno. Afterwards it works as a good gyno blocker and libido stmulent, but even with proviron, you have to get off and let the body take over. The big difference is, proviron won't hinder gains, cause mood swings and possibly RAISE estrogen the way clomid can.
 
whats wrong with fina/trenbolone?

I used it once and have to say I never gained so much from such a small dose. 50mg EOD for 6 weeks.
 
Nelson, I'm a huge fan of Proviron already, muscle hadness, libido, etc..., but are you saying that it would serve well as an anti-e during cycle in place of Arimidex, Aromasin, or Novadex?
As well as a "post-cycle" recovery aid?
Sounds good to me!
 
Just because other bodybuilders don't use Fina doesn't mean you shouldn't use Fina. I will use Fina because IT WORKS!!!
Until someone shows me proof that Fina has extremely negative effects on your body I will continue to punch my Fina and get huge.

As far as what Nelson is saying about Clomid it does make some sense.


I think if you are crashing hard at the end of your cycle then you are not lightly tapering your steroids off.
 
FreakMonster said:
Just because other bodybuilders don't use Fina doesn't mean you shouldn't use Fina. I will use Fina because IT WORKS!!!
Until someone shows me proof that Fina has extremely negative effects on your body I will continue to punch my Fina and get huge.

As far as what Nelson is saying about Clomid it does make some sense.


I think if you are crashing hard at the end of your cycle then you are not lightly tapering your steroids off.

Now we are jumping on the tapering bandwagon?? How can your body restart its HPTA with the presence of a synthetic androgen?? It wont!! Tapering will do nothing but prolong your recovery.

Nelson, please show me a study that show clomid to be supressive!
 
LAWNSAVER said:


Now we are jumping on the tapering bandwagon?? How can your body restart its HPTA with the presence of a synthetic androgen?? It wont!! Tapering will do nothing but prolong your recovery.

Nelson, please show me a study that show clomid to be supressive!

I'm not talking about restarting your HPTA. I'm talking about the reason why you are CRASHING!! Tapering allows for you not to crash so hard.
 
As for the point of taking nothing post cycle I won't make any scientific comments, I don't have any.

But I will say I've been around longer then most, long before the internet and I can tell you almost NO ONE did post cycle therapy back in the day. There were plenty of huge dudes back then too, and they did much lower doses then I see posted on this board.

So I don't think Nelson is crazy for suggesting it's not needed. I've done cycle's without any Clomid, and can't honestly say there was any difference from when I did do it to when I didn't. Only blood work would say for sure if post cycle therapy is needed or beneficial.
 
Fina is the gear of the gods!!!! Anyone who thinks different , either hasn't use it or is a moron.
People can tell you anything, but I know what works for me.
The 80's bodybuilders were great in their day, but their are 100's of BB out there now that blow them away. They are bigger and more muscular than ever. Better equipment, better nutrition and better chemical enhancements. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out, just look at the pics.

Zilla
 
FreakMonster said:


I'm not talking about restarting your HPTA. I'm talking about the reason why you are CRASHING!! Tapering allows for you not to crash so hard.


Freak, your not making any sense. How does tapering prevent crashing? Tapering does nothing to get your HPTA going faster. It doesnt do anything but prolong your recovery.

Genarr3, I'm not calling Nelson crazy, I mearly asking for some scientific backing stating clomid can be suppressive.

Doesnt the suppression of estrogen signal the body to produce more testosterone? The body knows it need estrogen, so to achieve that the boby produces more test, so that more will convert to estrogen. So when our sex drive comes back we take away the estrogen inhibitors so that the body feels like it is in homistasis. Is my though process wrong here? If there is to much estrogen in the body, it wont produce Test, because it thinks there is too much already. This is why we crash?

Obviously progesterone works a litttle different and is much more suppressive. This is why clomid isnt nearly as effective post cycle.
I stay awat from nandralone and tren, because of its extreme affect on my HPTA.


I am just trying to learn here. I want to know why I should stop what I have been doing and 99% of the people on this board. I am alway up to learn something different if it works! Please, Nelson teach me the proper way!!
 
LAWNSAVER said:



Freak, your not making any sense. How does tapering prevent crashing? Tapering does nothing to get your HPTA going faster. It doesnt do anything but prolong your recovery.


So your telling me that if I end my cycle with 1000mg of test on my last shot versus my last shot being 200mg of test that the crash is going to be the same? I would think you would crash alot harder coming off 1000mg of test and increasing your chances of major sides.
 
FreakMonster said:


So your telling me that if I end my cycle with 1000mg of test on my last shot versus my last shot being 200mg of test that the crash is going to be the same? I would think you would crash alot harder coming off 1000mg of test and increasing your chances of major sides.

Freak, you just shot yourself in the foot with that comment. Do you know how an ester works?? Esters do the tapering for you. Its called a halflife. The bottom line is that you will not begin to restart your HPTA until all the test is gone.

We are not talking about sides. If I was taking 1000mg of test, I would have arimidex, letrozole, or aromasin in the mix, which would keep most if not all of the estrogenic sides away.

We are talking about restoring your HPTA, not estrogenic sides.
The bottom line is that test tapers itself, so there is no need to taper the dose.

I am asking one question and I hope Nelson comes back to educate me on how clomid is suppressive. Also I want to be corrected and educated again on how the feedback loop works. Which is more important for HPTA recovery...Keeping estrogen levels low, so that the body is forced to produce more test, or do we need more estrogen for the body to produce more test??

Someone please answer these questions!!!
 
This is a great thread. Lawnsaver- Your aproach is classy. Its nice to see no matter how long you are in the game you never stop the quest for knowledge. More bro's should follow your lead.

Nelson- Say you used nolva or clomid for set # of weeks post cycle. When you come off of the anti-e's, does your body then produce more estrogen as a rebound effect?
 
Nelson --->
In 6 weeks you'd be back anyway. Plus, and I say this the 100,000000000th time, estrogen is necessary for growth and libido
ok if this is the case then we need to take a low dose estrogen pills. some birth control pills are made of estrogen right? so there we go pop some of those instead of clomid and that will help our HPTA case solved and it BC does not contain this, then use what women use after PMS to keepo a level of estrogen flowing whatever thats called
 
FreakMonster said:


So your telling me that if I end my cycle with 1000mg of test on my last shot versus my last shot being 200mg of test that the crash is going to be the same? I would think you would crash alot harder coming off 1000mg of test and increasing your chances of major sides.


you are looking at this all wrong, tapering only adds to the cycle length, causing more suppresion, all while running a dose of AS that is no longer ediquete to make GAINS.

EXAMPLE:

case 1:

6 weeks at 1000mg/test/week............week 7 off........this is only 6 week cycle, assuming fast acting test was used at the end

case 2:

6 weeks at 1000mg/test/week, 1 week at 800mg/test/week, 1 week at 600mg of test, 1 week at 400, 1 week at 200.......OFF....ends up being 10 week cycle, resulting in greater suppresion
 
easy said:


Nelson- Say you used nolva or clomid for set # of weeks post cycle. When you come off of the anti-e's, does your body then produce more estrogen as a rebound effect?

Bump for answer...
 
This is sad. You can have 10 "gurus" saying, "do this and supporting it with 10 studies and you can have 10 other "gurus"saying "dont do this" and having 10 studies that support their idea. Who the hell are you to believe????

I can see how using clomid post-cycle can still inhibit your HPTA but how can you ignore so many people who say they have crashed hard without clomid but rebounded 100x better with clomid??

Correct me if I am wrong (I am) but clomid stimulates the Hypothalamus which in-turn ->stimulates the pituitary and testes. So basically the only "unnatural" thing you are doing is jumpstarting the hypothalamus into doing something it hasnt done in a long time - but fromt there on your pituitary and testes are working by a natural process. So your natural hypothalamus recovery is only delayed no longer than the amount of time you are taking clomid at best, but your pituitary and testes are tricked into working much quicker??

Be easy on me.
 
Nelson Montana said:
Most of the people come on this board, not to learn, but to have their own beliefs confirmed. Tell them something that goes against that belief and they get defensive, even antagonistic.

You just described yourself to a T Nelson
 
What is an appropriate amount of Nolvadex to have on hand for post cycle therapy? After a ten week run with 500 of sust then how much nolv should i have on hand? also what about lasix?
 
Top Bottom