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

Reading through Nelson's book...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Citruscide
  • Start date Start date
C

Citruscide

Guest
Well... I will say I disagree with many things Nelson says... well.. not really MANY... just some. :)

But in reading through it... I have noticed he says alot of the same things that I believe to be ture, I just have to read it better... meaning, sometimes, I jump to conclusions as to what Nelson is SAYING... If I stop to think about it, I understand.

I just feel that I have been somewhat unfair to Nelson in the past... and have said things about him, generally, to others... based on a few disagrements I have with him.

BTW... these are all my own thoughts. Please cite them if you use them.

C-ditty
 
He does spark up quite a bit of discussion and controversy... but that is how questions are answered... whether Nelson be right or wrong. :)

C-ditty
 
NICE AVATAR! BTW, all hatred from others aside, I bought Nelson's book, and thought it was great! Especially in uncovering the truth about guys like Bill (Mr. Deca) Phillips and other convicted felon junior chemists who created all these worthless lines of garbage supplements.
 
I have read Nelson's book a few times now. Even for the experienced it is a great read. It truly is nice to see things from different perspectives. Peace

I like Poptarts
 
Actually, and this is the truth, Tom Platz said that Pop-Tarts are a great food for bodybuilders. I read it a long time ago and still remember. Tom! Are you out there? Nelson Montana needs your help.
 
But now that I think about it I believe he said it was good carbs pre-workout. This was before post-workout carbs became the mainstay.
 
Lift Chief said:
Hmmm i thought i was seeing things but that appears to be almighty's avatar... haha.

Is it Almighty... or is it me? How do you know???

BBKingpin... I think we should find out who first stated the pop-tart theory of MRP... that way, we can get to the bottom of this and start drawing out the assholes! :)

C-ditty
 
I can no longer tell if and when people are being serious, sarcastic or stupid.

Yes, it was I who started the whole Pop Tart thing.

It was meant to show that many MRP's and protein bars are just junk with protein and vitamins added. Ergo, eating a PopTart with a vitamin pill and a handful of aminos wouldn't be that different, in terms of its nutrient ratio, from most of the "food bars" out there.

At any rate, I think it was big of Citrue to make that initial statement at the beginning of the thread and I appreciate it.














.










Hey! What do you mean you disagree with me!?!
 
HAHA... I'm being serious!!! :)

I'm just saying, before I jump down your throad from now on... I'm going to step back and read what you are trying to say, rather than assume the worst. :)

As for the pop-tart thing... it is a joke between fellow mods... and it was interesting how you played into it... with the MRP example... :)

C-ditty
 
Citruscide said:


Is it Almighty... or is it me? How do you know???

BBKingpin... I think we should find out who first stated the pop-tart theory of MRP... that way, we can get to the bottom of this and start drawing out the assholes! :)

C-ditty

I don't get it. Are you calling me an asshole?
 
I still haven't read it...was plannin on getting around to it after my studies on some compounds are done.

Fonz
 
40butpumpin said:


I can tell by the posts.

Yes. But it might be a little easier to look at the username above the avatar. Also, my designation is "Moderator"... not that it MEANS anything though. :)

C-ditty
 
BBkingpin said:


I don't get it. Are you calling me an asshole?

You ARE an attorney... wait a second... I'm an attorney as well... looks like I'm calling us BOTH assholes.

C-ditty ;)
 
Citruscide said:


Yes. But it might be a little easier to look at the username above the avatar. Also, my designation is "Moderator"... not that it MEANS anything though. :)

C-ditty

I'm well aware of the username and designation, however, it really isn't necessary to look.

The avatar is what throws me, I'm just not used to seeing a "Moderator" take a board member's avatar as a show of disrespect.
 
40butpumpin said:


I'm well aware of the username and designation, however, it really isn't necessary to look.

The avatar is what throws me, I'm just not used to seeing a "Moderator" take a board member's avatar as a show of disrespect.

Good spirited humor my man... good spirited humor...

Now... can we discuss Nelson's book please???

C-ditty
 
Citruscide said:


Good spirited humor my man... good spirited humor...

Now... can we discuss Nelson's book please???

C-ditty

Show yourself to be the Moderator that you are and give the avatar back. If not, your avatar is -- in and of itself -- a distraction to every thread you post on.

But that's just my opinion.
 
Citrus, do you now agree with Nelsons use of nolvadex post cycle instead of clomid, or is that going too far?
 
jubei said:
Citrus, do you now agree with Nelsons use of nolvadex post cycle instead of clomid, or is that going too far?

Hmm... I was under the impression that Nelson totally disagreed with Anti-e's in general.

If you do a search on this topic and my name with it... you'll see I say the same thing. I think Nolva and Clomid work in much the same way... while not ON a cycle of test/anabolics, they act to competitively bind with estrogen receptors, thereby allowing the hypothalimus and pitu gland back "online"... so IMO... they will accomplish the same task.

Now, when I take clomid, I get some decent acne... I have felt "somewhat" emotional... but not a sob story emotional... but somewhat... on NOLVA... I dont' get any of those effects.

Now, someone published a study of how clomid doesn't cause the emotional reactions ... but rather the coming down of the "high" caused by testosterone... I think it was "***" the member who posted it.

What I do, post cycle (if I ever go off -- lol), is to hit HCG around the same time I hit my last shot of test (usually using cyp/enth) at around 1000iu... then every 3 days hit 500iu until I get to the last 1000iu and I hit it all at once... then I'm done with 5000iu. I do this because for that 2-3 week period... your body will still have the test from your shot... in the meantime, you will start the test production up in your testes.. (but not your hypo/pitu)... so by the time your test runs out from your last shot... your testes are back online... and you are ready to start your post cycle nolva/clomid therapy... whichever you prefer. Doing the HCG this way... will avoid a rapid drop off, if you wait 2-3 weeks and then starting your clomid/nolva... especially if you've run a long cycle.

It comes down to preference... but nolva has always worked better for me, with less sides.

I'm a big fan of Nolva during and post-cycle.

C-ditty
 
jubei said:
Citrus, do you now agree with Nelsons use of nolvadex post cycle instead of clomid, or is that going too far?

Nelson does not advocate Nolvadex post cycle instead of clomid. He says they were both ineffective for him, and I agree about nolva being a mistake post-cycle as well. I've seen guys lose ALL of their gains from using nolva post cycle instead of clomid. That's enough for me to stay the hell away from that route.
 
DeepZenPill said:


Nelson does not advocate Nolvadex post cycle instead of clomid. He says they were both ineffective for him, and I agree about nolva being a mistake post-cycle as well. I've seen guys lose ALL of their gains from using nolva post cycle instead of clomid. That's enough for me to stay the hell away from that route.

DEBATE!! YAY!! :)

C-ditty
 
Normally my post-cycle routine woudl look like this:

Arimidex: 1gm Eod

500IU's of HCG for 20 days (the last two weeks of the cycle and into the post cycle)

20mg's of Nova ed (I also run Nova at 10-20mg's throughout the cycle since I'm prone to gyno)

Clomid therapy starting the day after the last HCG injections and two out from the last shot of Enan.

Clomid therapy: 36 pills. 300mg day 1, 100mg next 10, 50mg final 10.

This time I'm going to try a new approach that will go like this:

Week 1-10 : cycle

Week 10,11,12 : HCG, but a less frequent pattern. Some people react better to a less frequent dosing, others to more frequent dosing. Instead of 500 ed, I'm going to go for 1500IU's every 3 days, or 3000/3000/1500/1500 every 5 days

I'm going to start the Nolva week 10 at a steady 20 mg and continue to run it until I come off the clomid. Remember that Nolva offers us the distinct advantage of sensitizing LH response to GnRH.

Then I'm going to start the clomid at a dose of 150 mg for weeks 12 and 13, then lower it to 100 for weeks 14 and 15.

I'm also considering the use of 50 mg of the anti-androgen spironolactone during week 12 to speed up the progress.

The only flaw in this is that you may feel a little down in weeks 12 and 13.
 
JA -- isn't HCG only good for 2 weeks in the fridge? Do you use more than one amp of it over the 3 weeks?

C-ditty
 
Citruscide said:
JA -- isn't HCG only good for 2 weeks in the fridge? Do you use more than one amp of it over the 3 weeks?

C-ditty

HCG has a shelf live of a month after it's been reconstituted. One vial is 5,000IU's.
 
Are you sure about that, I thought it was 8 weeks if kept in the fridge. I'll double check.
 
I guess I was being conservative, it is 10 weeks.
 
Juice Authority said:


HCG has a shelf live of a month after it's been reconstituted. One vial is 5,000IU's.

Shelf -- in the fridge?

Cool... I always thought it was 2 weeks... go figure... LOL

C-ditty
 
Citruscide said:


Shelf -- in the fridge?

Cool... I always thought it was 2 weeks... go figure... LOL

C-ditty

Yeah, by shelf I meant in the fridge.
 
Nolva and clomid are so similar they're almost indistinguisable. Although people tend to get more "weepy" on Clomid.

My whole stance on anti-es is that they are overused and in many cases unnecessary. That doesn't meant you can shoot a gram of test a week and pop a couple of A-bombs a day and not use any anti-e's.

"Hey. Nelson told me I didn't need clomid and now I have gyno -- the mother fucker!!!"

There are ways around not using anti-e's (as pofessed with my sample cycle.) I hate to drop this in mannys lap but he did a sample cycle wit no anti-e's and got great results.
And there are also natural anti-e alternatives. Be that as it may, I agree with Citrue about the HCG. If you're coming off a heavy/long cycle, it's a must. The only difference is, post therepy I would recommend proviron instead of the clomid.

And BTW, this topic isn't addressed in my book so if that's what you're looking for, save your money. The Bodybuilding Truth is more about miscoceptons of training and dieting and an expose of the industry. My new book "Bottom Line Bodybuilding" is more drug oriented, if that's your area of interest.
 
Wow... I agree with you on a topic. I think proviron would be a good choice post cycle as well... I just afford Nolva better. :)

Can't wait for the new book... and all the arguments that will ensue. :) LOL

C-ditty
 
Nelson Montana said:
Nolva and clomid are so similar they're almost indistinguisable. Although people tend to get more "weepy" on Clomid.

My whole stance on anti-es is that they are overused and in many cases unnecessary. That doesn't meant you can shoot a gram of test a week and pop a couple of A-bombs a day and not use any anti-e's.

"Hey. Nelson told me I didn't need clomid and now I have gyno -- the mother fucker!!!"

There are ways around not using anti-e's (as pofessed with my sample cycle.) I hate to drop this in mannys lap but he did a sample cycle wit no anti-e's and got great results.
And there are also natural anti-e alternatives. Be that as it may, I agree with Citrue about the HCG. If you're coming off a heavy/long cycle, it's a must. The only difference is, post therepy I would recommend proviron instead of the clomid.

And BTW, this topic isn't addressed in my book so if that's what you're looking for, save your money. The Bodybuilding Truth is more about miscoceptons of training and dieting and an expose of the industry. My new book "Bottom Line Bodybuilding" is more drug oriented, if that's your area of interest.

Nelson...

Using HCG post-cycle does nothing to restore your HTPA; HCG causes further inhibition of the HPTA. In some cases it very well might prolong your recovery. HCG's brings shrunken balls back up to their original condition in preparation for post-cycle Clomid therapy. Using HCG before clomid therapy is necessary because atrophied testis produce reduced levels of natural testosterone. After a long cycle the body is in a state of catabolism.

"Clomid is NECESSARY since it stimulates the hypophysis to release more gonadotropin so that a faster and higher release of follicle stimulating hormone aud luteinizing hormone occurs. This results in an increase of the body's own testosterone production".

References: The FAQ on CLomid courtsey of The Iron Game
 
Juice Authority said:


Nelson...

Using HCG post-cycle does nothing to restore your HTPA; HCG causes further inhibition of the HPTA. In some cases it very well might prolong your recovery. HCG's brings shrunken balls back up to their original condition in preparation for post-cycle Clomid therapy. Using HCG before clomid therapy is necessary because atrophied testis produce reduced levels of natural testosterone. After a long cycle the body is in a state of catabolism.

"Clomid is NECESSARY since it stimulates the hypophysis to release more gonadotropin so that a faster and higher release of follicle stimulating hormone aud luteinizing hormone occurs. This results in an increase of the body's own testosterone production".

References: The FAQ on CLomid courtsey of The Iron Game

I agree with you. POST-cycle... hcg will cause further inhibition... it only acts to restore test production in the testes... not the Hypothalimus/Pitu glands... and will in fact, inhibit this recovery.

However, if you take the HCG right around the time of your LAST test shot (assuming you are taking cyp/enth) like I discribed above... then by the time you start your clomid/nolva/proviron or whatever you prefer... the HCG will have already spiked your testes back on line, there by eliminating any sort of crash and thereby, loss of muscle (especially in heavy cycles). When you start your post-therapy... the hcg should not interfere.

But I agree with you... if you take hcg along with the nolva post-cycle... it will throw down some interference.

C-ditty
 
Maybe I misunderstood him. I thought he was advocating the use of HCG post-cycle along with Proviron.
 
Juice Authority said:
Maybe I misunderstood him. I thought he was advocating the use of HCG post-cycle along with Proviron.

if that was his advocation... then you are correct. :) I just thought he was agreeing with me... LOL ... maybe I was misunderstood there!! :)

C-ditty
 
Citrue: Again, I agree. Come on! Who is this really?

No, the proviron follows the HCG. But you have to realize, everything is just delaying the inevitable to a degree. Since HCG will alleviate atrophied testicles they have a better chance of getting back "up" so to speak. But still, it just cushions the crash.

Also, Clomid DOES NOT increase testosterone! (Fonz?) By lowering estrogen, some people may get an elevated T level, but there's no guarentee. Also, clomid raises SHBG, so the tiny bit of T you get may be wasted. Not to mention (for the 1000000000th time) some people really react badly to it. The dick deadening aspects alone make it a non issue for me, and others. But if you absolutely love it, knock yourself out.
 
Nelson Montana said:
Citrue: Again, I agree. Come on! Who is this really?


heh heh ... I don't know brotha... but I remember reading about what clomid does... and what nolva does... and then about a month later thinking "what a tic... they do the same damn thing!!" :)

C-ditty
 
Nelson Montana said:
Also, Clomid DOES NOT increase testosterone! (Fonz?) By lowering estrogen, some people may get an elevated T level, but there's no guarentee. Also, clomid raises SHBG, so the tiny bit of T you get may be wasted. Not to mention (for the 1000000000th time) some people really react badly to it. The dick deadening aspects alone make it a non issue for me, and others. But if you absolutely love it, knock yourself out.

Is this your personal opinion or is it grounded in fact?? Are there any studies you can show that substantiate your position? If so, I'd love to read them. Here's a study for you that completely contradicts your theory on clomid:

This study shows that clomid is better than Nolva to recover HTPA.

Disparate effect of clomiphene and tamoxifen on pituitary gonadotropin release in vitro.

Adashi EY, Hsueh AJ, Bambino TH, Yen SS.

The direct effects of clomiphene citrate (Clomid), tamoxifen, and estradiol (E2) on the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH)-stimulated release of luteinizing hormone (LH) and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) were studied in cultured anterior pituitary cells obtained from adult ovariectomized rats. Treatment of pituitary cells with Clomid or enclomid (10(-8) M) in vitro for 2 days resulted in a marked sensitization of the gonadotroph to GnRH as reflected by a 6.5-fold decrease in the ED50 of GnRH in terms of LH release from 2.2 x 10(-9) M in untreated cells to 3.6 x 10(-10) M. Treatment with E2 or Clomid also increased the sensitivity of the gonadotroph to GnRH in terms of FSH release by 4.3- and 3.3-fold respectively. Tamoxifen, a related antiestrogen, comparable to Clomid in terms of its ability to compete with E2 for pituitary estrogen receptors, was without effect on the GnRH-stimulated LH release at a concentration of 10(-7) M. Furthermore, tamoxifen, unlike Clomid, caused an apparent but not statistically significant inhibition of the sensitizing effect of E2 on the GnRH-stimulated release of LH. Our findings suggest that Clomid and its Enclomid isomer, unlike tamoxifen, exert a direct estrogenic rather than an antiestrogenic effect on cultured pituitary cells by enhancing the GnRH-stimulated release of gonadotropin.

PMID: 6781360 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
 
Here's some more for you:

J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1985 Nov;61(5):842-5

Evidence for a role of endogenous estrogen in the hypothalamic control of gonadotropin secretion in men.

Winters SJ, Troen P.

To examine the mechanism by which endogenous estrogens inhibit gonadotropin secretion in men, blood samples were drawn every 10 min for 12 h in five men before and at the completion of 3 weeks of treatment with the estrogen antagonist clomiphene citrate (50 mg twice daily). Samples were analyzed for LH and alpha-subunit by RIA. Clomiphene produced a 3-fold rise in circulating LH levels, which was associated with a 80% increase in pulse frequency and a 70% increase in pulse amplitude. Immunoreactive alpha-subunit secretion was also pulsatile before and after clomiphene treatment. Mean alpha-levels rose 70%, together with a 39% increase in pulse frequency and a 41% increase in pulse amplitude. Circulating testosterone and estradiol levels increased 2-fold and FSH levels increased 3-fold after clomiphene treatment. Insofar as each LH and uncombined alpha-subunit pulse reflects a LHRH secretory episode, our data indicate that endogenous estrogens tonically restrain the hypothalamic release of LHRH. From these results and those of previous studies, we conclude that estrogens as well as androgens are important in the testicular feedback inhibition of the hypothalamic oscillator that governs pulsatile gonadotropin secretion.


J Androl 1991 Jul-Aug;12(4):258-63

The effects of normal aging on the response of the pituitary-gonadal axis to chronic clomiphene administration in men.

Tenover JS, Bremner WJ.

Department of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle.

Serum androgens decline with age in normal men, despite normal or elevated bioactive serum gonadotropins, suggesting that primary testicular dysfunction occurs with aging. The authors further assessed the question of age-related testicular dysfunction by evaluating whether raising serum gonadotropins above the normal serum range for an extended time in healthy elderly men might result in bringing their gonadal function to a level similar to that found in young adult men. Five elderly (65 to 85 years old) and five young adult men (26 to 33 years old) were given 50 mg of clomiphene citrate (CC) twice a day for 8 weeks to stimulate gonadotropin production. During that time, testosterone (T), non-sex hormone-binding globulin bound T, and estradiol increased significantly in both age groups, while serum inhibin increased significantly only in the young adult men. The increases in serum androgens with CC administration were significantly greater in the young adult men than in the elderly men. These hormone changes occurred in the setting of serum gonadotropins that increased significantly in both age groups, although there was a tendency for the elderly men to have a smaller increase in luteinizing hormone. Despite 8 weeks of stimulation of the pituitary-gonadal axis by CC administration, the elderly men demonstrated significantly diminished testicular responses compared with the young adult men. Sertoli cell function, as determined by inhibin production, was more diminished in the elderly men than was Leydig cell function. These data strengthen the hypothesis that normal aging in men is accompanied by a decline in testicular function.


Urology 1991 Oct;38(4):317-22

Possible hypothalamic impotence. Male counterpart to hypothalamic amenorrhea?

Guay AT, Bansal S, Hodge MB.

Section of Endocrinology, Lahey Clinic Medical Center, Burlington, Massachusetts.

Twenty-one men with erectile complaints who were found to have a low level of serum testosterone without a reciprocal elevation of the serum levels of luteinizing hormone were evaluated to identify whether the defect was of hypothalamic or of pituitary origin. Patients underwent a luteinizing hormone (LH)-follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH)-releasing hormone stimulation test that showed a normal but sluggish increase in LH and FSH levels, thus ruling out a pituitary defect and suggesting a suprapituitary abnormality. This was confirmed when, in response to clomiphene, patients had a normal increase in gonadotropin and testosterone levels. Although the basal as well as clomiphene and gonadotropin releasing hormone-stimulated levels of total testosterone and gonadotropins were identical in men less than and more than fifty years old, the elevation of free testosterone levels in response to clomiphene was higher in patients younger than fifty. This suggested that although the primary abnormality found in these patients is altered secretion of gonadotropin hormone-releasing hormone from the hypothalamus, an age-related decline in the responsivity of Leydig cells to LH may make it more manifest in older patients. Elevation of testosterone levels from a subnormal to a normal range in response to clomiphene administered for seven days suggests that the defect is functional and reversible and that the drug may be useful in treatment of sexual dysfunction in this group of patients.
Nephron 1993;63(4):390-4

Effect of clomiphene citrate on hormonal profile in male hemodialysis and kidney transplant patients.

Martin-Malo A, Benito P, Castillo D, Espinosa M, Burdiel LG, Perez R, Aljama P.

Department of Nephrology, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofia, Cordoba, Spain.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of clomiphene citrate (CC) therapy in the hypothalamus-pituitary-gonadal axis of male uremic subjects. Thirty-four patients on hemodialysis (HD) and 8 successful kidney transplant subjects (RT) were evaluated. Nine healthy males were used as controls (C). At baseline, zinc, testosterone (TEST), prolactin (PRL), FSH, LH and estradiol plasma concentrations were measured. All subjects were treated with CC (100 mg/day) for a week. The aforementioned parameters were determined again on the seventh day of CC therapy, and 3 days after drug withdrawal. Following CC, there was a rise in FSH, LH and TEST levels in all subjects (p < 0.05); it is interesting to stress that TEST became normal in HD. In addition, we observed a decrease of PRL after CC only in HD patients (p < 0.01). In summary, CC was able to partially correct most of the hormonal disturbances of the gonadal axis in uremic patients.
 
Citruscide said:


heh heh ... I don't know brotha... but I remember reading about what clomid does... and what nolva does... and then about a month later thinking "what a tic... they do the same damn thing!!" :)

C-ditty

:busy: Nice to see you getting along. I'm going to cry.
 
Nelson Montana said:
Citrue: Again, I agree. Come on! Who is this really?

No, the proviron follows the HCG. But you have to realize, everything is just delaying the inevitable to a degree. Since HCG will alleviate atrophied testicles they have a better chance of getting back "up" so to speak. But still, it just cushions the crash.

Also, Clomid DOES NOT increase testosterone! (Fonz?)

It does....minimally. I'm not a big fan of clomid either.

There's other better substances. But they are expensive.
Right now I'm working out how to combine Cabergoline, Androgel and low dose Proviron for "OFF" periods. If I'm right, you could maintain high "normal" test levels(Range 200-1100...High: 900+)
with a minimal LH and FSH impact.

Nelson, while I agree with some of your points, you're "old school" in my eyes. This is not necessarily a bad thing. Its just that it doesn't advance the science of bodybuilding IMO.
Just re-iterates points that people often overlook...which again is not necessarily a bad thing. I tend to be more progressive in my views, always trying to push the scientific envelope b/c I like to apply ideas into practice. Your ideas and books are things newbies and moderately enlightened hard training individuals should definately read. But for vets....they are things we have heard a zillion times.

Anyways, thats my honest point of view of the subject.
I hope you didn't take offense, but thats just the way I look at it.

Fonz
 
Fonz said:


It does....minimally. I'm not a big fan of clomid either.

There's other better substances. But they are expensive.
Right now I'm working out how to combine Cabergoline, Androgel and low dose Proviron for "OFF" periods. If I'm right, you could maintain high "normal" test levels(Range 200-1100...High: 900+)
with a minimal LH and FSH impact.

Nelson, while I agree with some of your points, you're "old school" in my eyes. This is not necessarily a bad thing. Its just that it doesn't advance the science of bodybuilding IMO.
Just re-iterates points that people often overlook...which again is not necessarily a bad thing. I tend to be more progressive in my views, always trying to push the scientific envelope b/c I like to apply ideas into practice. Your ideas and books are things newbies and moderately enlightened hard training individuals should definately read. But for vets....they are things we have heard a zillion times.

Anyways, thats my honest point of view of the subject.
I hope you didn't take offense, but thats just the way I look at it.

Fonz

Fonz - you actually agree with Nelson on his clomid theory???
 
Nelson Montana said:
Also, Clomid DOES NOT increase testosterone! (Fonz?) By lowering estrogen, some people may get an elevated T level, but there's no guarentee. Also, clomid raises SHBG, so the tiny bit of T you get may be wasted. Not to mention (for the 1000000000th time) some people really react badly to it. The dick deadening aspects alone make it a non issue for me, and others. But if you absolutely love it, knock yourself out.

Posted by hhajdo:

"Actually, Clomid does increase testosterone - not by lowering estrogen, - it increases LHRH & LH....

That doesn't result in lowered estrogen levels, estrogen is actually increased since test is increased....

It does increase SHBG, but that's not really that bad since your SHBG is very low at the end of the cycle..."
 
Juice Authority said:


Fonz - you actually agree with Nelson on his clomid theory???

Not agree. I just thing Clomid is crap.
Sure, it works in most people...but as I said there are
better options. The reason Clomid is used by so many people is b/c it is very cheap and easy to acquire.
Clomid also causes mood swings and acne in a LOT of people.

Androgel+Cabergoline is going to be the next generation clomid once they become cheaper and more available. These 2 will NOT cause mood swings...and way less acne.

I'm sure I'll get blasted for even suggesting this, but thats my view.

Fonz
 
Juice: Why is it if I and many others have a first hand account of something it isn't a fact that we had it??? Do you have to see a study that proves there's such a thing a gravity before you believe it?

Also, that first study was done with RATS! (What exactly are you suggesting?) The second one...geez, I addressed this on the bb.com board. This is getting out of control

hjados study that shows clomid cause an increase in T AND e proves my point. Maybe the increase in e is what meses some people up. The symptoms sure feel like too much e. But a cycle lowers SHBG? Where'd THAT come from?

Fonz: Fair enough. But just because I'm old school does not mean I shut myself off from new discoveries. I'm not predudiced and I'm not close minded. In fact, I get a big kick out of new information and I believe I've presented quite a bit of it here.

Hell, I can say that all you people who still believe in aerobics are old school! (And I'd be right).

We need all types. New isn't necessarily better and old isn't necessarily better. We should draw upon all available information and intelligent theories. There's room for everyone, as long as they have something to offer.
 
"But a cycle lowers SHBG? Where'd THAT come from?"



In general, androgens & glucocorticoids decrease SHBG, while estrogens increase it....

J Steroid Biochem 1985 Jul;23(1):33-8 Related Articles, Links


Response of serum testosterone and its precursor steroids, SHBG and CBG to anabolic steroid and testosterone self-administration in man.

Ruokonen A, Alen M, Bolton N, Vihko R.

The influence of high doses of testosterone and anabolic steroids on testicular endocrine function and on circulating steroid binding proteins, sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) and cortisol binding globulin (CBG), were investigated in power athletes for 26 weeks of steroid self-administration and for the following 16 weeks after drug withdrawal. Serum testosterone and androstenedione concentrations increased (P less than 0.05) but pregnenolone, 17-hydroxypregnenolone, dehydroepiandrosterone, 5-androstene-3 beta, 17 beta-diol, progesterone and 17-hydroxyprogesterone concentrations strongly decreased (P less than 0.001) during steroid administration. Serum pregnenolone, 17-hydroxypregnenolone and dehydroepiandrosterone sulphate concentrations followed the changes of the corresponding unconjugated steroids but 5-androstene-3 beta, 17 beta-diol and testosterone sulphate concentrations remained unchanged during the follow-up time. During drug administration SHBG concentrations decreased by about 80 to 90% and remained low even for the 16 weeks following steroid withdrawal. Steroid administration had no influence on serum CBG concentrations. In conclusion, self-administration of testosterone and anabolic steroids soon led to impairment of testicular endocrine function which was characterized by low concentrations of testosterone precursors, high ratios of testosterone to its precursor steroids and low SHBG concentrations. Decreased concentrations of SHBG and testicular steroids were still partly evident during the 16 weeks after drug withdrawal. The depressed circulating levels of dehydroepiandrosterone and its sulphate may indicate that the androgenic-anabolic steroids also suppress adrenal androgen production.


J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1989 Jun;68(6):1195-200 Related Articles, Links


Sex hormone-binding globulin response to the anabolic steroid stanozolol: evidence for its suitability as a biological androgen sensitivity test.

Sinnecker G, Kohler S.

Department of Pediatrics, University of Hamburg, West Germany.

Both the androgen-induced decline in serum sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) levels during puberty and the anabolic effect of exogenous testosterone are absent in patients with androgen insensitivity (testicular feminization). To determine whether the androgen-induced decline in serum SHBG could be used as a test of androgen sensitivity, we studied the effect of the anabolic-androgenic steroid stanozolol (17 beta-hydroxy-17 alpha-methyl-5 alpha-androstano-[3,2-c]pyrazol) on serum SHBG in 25 control subjects, 3 patients with complete androgen insensitivity, and 4 patients with partial androgen insensitivity. Stanozolol was administered orally for 3 days (0.2 mg/kg.day); blood samples were taken before and 5, 6, 7, and 8 days after the beginning of the test for measurements of serum SHBG. The lowest value (i.e. the peak response) in each subject was used as the measure of the response to stanozolol. In the control subjects the mean nadir serum SHBG level was 51.6 +/- 5.9% (+/- SD) of the initial value (P less than 0.001). In the 4 patients with partial androgen insensitivity the nadir serum SHBG ranged from 73-89%, and in the 3 patients with complete androgen insensitivity it ranged from 93-97% of the initial value. Thus, the decrease in serum SHBG after short term administration of stanozolol reflects androgen responsiveness and, thus, may be used to differentiate patients with androgen insensitivity syndromes from those with other causes of male pseudohermaphroditism


Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 1993 Apr;38(4):393-8 Related Articles, Links


The effects of oxandrolone on the growth hormone and gonadal axes in boys with constitutional delay of growth and puberty.

Malhotra A, Poon E, Tse WY, Pringle PJ, Hindmarsh PC, Brook CG.

Endocrine Unit, Middlesex Hospital, London, UK.

OBJECTIVE: We studied the effects of oxandrolone on serum concentrations of LH, FSH, testosterone, GH, SHBG, DHEAS, IGF-I and insulin in boys with constitutional delay of growth and puberty. DESIGN: Ten boys with constitutional delay of growth and puberty, mean age 13.8 years (range 12.4-15.5) were studied. Twenty-four-hour serum concentration profiles of GH, LH and FSH were constructed by drawing blood samples at 20-minute intervals. Three study occasions over a period of 6 months were chosen to assess hormone concentrations before, during and 6 weeks after a 3-month course of oxandrolone (2.5 mg once daily) therapy. RESULTS: Growth velocity increased during oxandrolone treatment and stayed higher after therapy (pre 3.9 +/- 0.5; on 6.3 +/- 0.8; post 6.4 +/- 0.9 cm/year (mean +/- SEM) two way ANOVA, F = 5.3, P = 0.02). Oxandrolone had androgenic effects, suppressing mean serum LH concentrations from 1.7 +/- 0.3 to 1.1 +/- 0.2 U/I and serum testosterone concentrations from 1.9 +/- 0.6 to 0.8 +/- 0.1 nmol/l. SHBG concentrations were also reduced from 130.9 +/- 14.6 to 30.7 +/- 7.3 nmol/l. Serum GH concentration fell slightly from 5.9 +/- 0.6 to 4.8 +/- 0.5 mU/l. After cessation of treatment, there was a significant 'rebound' in mean 24-hour serum LH (2.6 U/l +/- 0.4) and testosterone concentrations (3.2 +/- 0.9 nmol/l) but no change in serum GH concentrations. SHBG values also rose but not to the same extent as those observed before therapy (82.0 +/- 8.4 nmol/l). There were no statistically significant differences in serum concentrations of FSH, DHEAS, IGF-I and insulin over the study period. In a stepwise multiple regression analysis of factors that might influence the growth rate observed, the 24-hour mean serum testosterone concentration and the treatment (on or off) with oxandrolone were the main influences. The relationship was described by the equation Height velocity = 0.69 (24-hour mean serum testosterone concentration)+1.70 (treatment regimen)+3.37 (adjusted R2 = 0.35, F = 8.39, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Oxandrolone has an androgenic action as shown by changes in serum LH, testosterone and SHBG concentrations and by the lack of effect on FSH. No effect of oxandrolone on the GH axis was documented. We suggest that the growth promoting effects of oxandrolone are related in part to the mild androgenic effects of the steroid and the growth acceleration following oxandrolone withdrawal may reflect increasing total serum testosterone concentrations and decreasing levels of SHBG and progress in puberty.


http://ajpendo.physiology.org/cgi/content-nw/full/281/6/E1172/T2

.......
 
Good one hhajdo.

I fogot about winstrol -- of course. The same goes for Proviron. It too reduces SHBG.

But I wasn't aware exo T had that much of an influence. (At least in that study) Interesting.
 
DAMN!! Some good posts being put up on this thread... Keep this thing going like this, and I'll move it over into the Best of Elite! :)

C-ditty
 
Nelson Montana said:
Juice: Why is it if I and many others have a first hand account of something it isn't a fact that we had it??? Do you have to see a study that proves there's such a thing a gravity before you believe it?

Nelson, don't get me wrong, I enjoy reading your controversial posts. Some of your ideas are out in left field but you do seem to be very knowledgeable in certain areas. However, in the area of anti-e's and post-cycle recovery I think you're mostly shooting from hip and giving some bad advice. People who don't actually know better might take that advice even though none of it is grounded in fact and is pure speculation on your part. That ends up being a disservice. If you have some concrete evidence in the form of studies that validate your claim please post them up. Otherwise, it's just an opinion and should be taken as such.
 
I've already stated my opinion on bb.com but just for shits I'll say it here.

I am still yet to see a SINGLE study backing up Nelson's ideas. That's where I run into problems. I think we can all agree that a few testimonials don't amount to much. While you have some problems with some of the studies I've put up over on bb.com, like I've said there are problems with every study. Unless you specifically conduct a study for your specific purposes then it is not 100% applicable. However if there are study after study that shows supports the same point can make fairly accurate inferences. I mean there are lots of studies out there that show clomid raises LH, FSH and testosterone levels, which is why we take clomid to begin with.....I am yet to see studies that show otherwise, hence I don't really see how one can even make an argument otherwise.
 
McBane said:
I've already stated my opinion on bb.com but just for shits I'll say it here.

I am still yet to see a SINGLE study backing up Nelson's ideas. That's where I run into problems. I think we can all agree that a few testimonials don't amount to much. While you have some problems with some of the studies I've put up over on bb.com, like I've said there are problems with every study. Unless you specifically conduct a study for your specific purposes then it is not 100% applicable. However if there are study after study that shows supports the same point can make fairly accurate inferences. I mean there are lots of studies out there that show clomid raises LH, FSH and testosterone levels, which is why we take clomid to begin with.....I am yet to see studies that show otherwise, hence I don't really see how one can even make an argument otherwise.

Post those same studies over here so the people here can read them understand that Nelson is just trying to spur a controversial discussion with absolutely no facts to support this inaccurate theory of his.
 
McBane said:
I've already stated my opinion on bb.com but just for shits I'll say it here.

I am still yet to see a SINGLE study backing up Nelson's ideas. That's where I run into problems. I think we can all agree that a few testimonials don't amount to much. While you have some problems with some of the studies I've put up over on bb.com, like I've said there are problems with every study. Unless you specifically conduct a study for your specific purposes then it is not 100% applicable. However if there are study after study that shows supports the same point can make fairly accurate inferences. I mean there are lots of studies out there that show clomid raises LH, FSH and testosterone levels, which is why we take clomid to begin with.....I am yet to see studies that show otherwise, hence I don't really see how one can even make an argument otherwise.

Going back and forth between boards, and discussing different topics can(and does) become a pain. Don't worry about any flames...they will not happen. I will delete any poster who does.
So, please go ahead and post the pertinent studies and we will discuss them in a civil manner.

Fonz
 
Show yourself to be the Moderator that you are and give the avatar back. If not, your avatar is -- in and of itself -- a distraction to every thread you post on.



OMG. I hope you are not arguing about a fucking avatar. This place gets more and more like a soap opera everyday.
 
Fonz said:
Going back and forth between boards, and discussing different topics can(and does) become a pain. Don't worry about any flames...they will not happen. I will delete any poster who does.
So, please go ahead and post the pertinent studies and we will discuss them in a civil manner.Fonz

Well, here's one I'd like to get Nelson's take on...

Abstract 798 MSSE Suppl 2000

Pharmaceutical intervention of anabolic steroid induced hypogonadism – our success at restoration of the hpg axis

Scally C, Street C

High-dose anabolic-androgenic steroid (AAS) administration results in hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (HH). Physical manifestations can include one or more of the following: depression, decreased sexual desire, impotence, feelings of apathy, testicular atrophy, and loss of muscle mass and strength. Due to feedback inhibition, laboratory values drop well below established physiologic norms: leutinizing hormone (LH) > 3.6 IU/L, follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) > 2.25 IU/L, and testosterone y 300 ng/dL. A search of the literature reveals an absence of studies dealing specifically with AAS-induced HH, and restoration of normal endocrine function.
We report on two interesting cases of AAS using bodybuilders who were brought out of the hypogonadal state. Blood samples were taken in the morning for both subjects and analysed using chemiluminescence (Quest diagnostics, Irving, TX). Post therapy samples were taken 15 days after the last HCG injection.

Case I: 6’0’’ 206 lbs., 33 years old Caucasian male with a 10+ year history of steroid-administration for bodybuilding and Powerlifting. By his own admission he was a “heavy” user, taking from 500 mg/week to 2+ grams/week. Pre-treatment values: LH>1.0 IU/L, T 191 ng/dL. One course of therapy (32 days) was given: 2,500 IU of HCG every 4 days (8 injections total), 50 mg clomifen bid and 10 mg tamoxifen qd. Despite massive drug use patient was an exceptionally good responder. Post-treatment values: LH 5.2 IU/L, T 1072 ng/dL.

Case 2: 5’10’’ 184 lbs, 36 years old Caucasian male with a 2 year history of continuous nandrolone use (200-400 mg/week). Pre treatment values: LH >1.0 IU/L, T 45 ng/dL. Treatment I (32 days): 2,500 IU HCG every 4 days (8 total), clomifen 50 mg bid, arimidex 1 mg qd. Post values: LH > 1.0 IU/L, T 38 ng/dL. Treatment 2 (60 days): 5,000 IU HCG every 4 days (4 inj. total), followed by 2,500 IU HCG every 4 d (4 inj. total), clomifen (50 mg bid) and tamoxifen (10 mg qd). Post-values: LH > 1.4 IU/L, T 63 ng/dL. Treatment 3 (32 days): 5,000 IU HCG qod (6 inj. total) followed by 2,500 IU HCG qod (6 inj. total) given simultaneously with menotropins 150 IU qod (6 inj. total), clomifen (50 mg bid) and tamoxifen (10 mg bid). Post-values: LH 9.8 IU/L, T 507 ng/dL.
Restoration of the HPG axis, even in severe cases of hypogonadism, is possible with combined therapies and careful monitoring of the patient. With continued popularity of these drugs, long-term androgen deficiency is a health concern for former AAS users.
 
Nelson Montana said:
There are ways around not using anti-e's (as pofessed with my sample cycle.) I hate to drop this in mannys lap but he did a sample cycle wit no anti-e's and got great results.
And there are also natural anti-e alternatives. Be that as it may, I agree with Citrue about the HCG. If you're coming off a heavy/long cycle, it's a must. The only difference is, post therepy I would recommend proviron instead of the clomid.

Your argument here is and I quote "PROVIRON is far superior to Clomid in every way. For one thing, it DECREASES SHBG whereas Clomid increases it."

Well, as people have already pointed out, you want higher SHBG levels after a cycle.

"Higher SHBG levels means more bound test = faster recovery,then low free test leads to a bigger release of LH wich should be a good thing post cycle ,You will have less free test but the total amount of test will be the same. A bigger amount of free test will inhibit LHRH/LH by negative feedback, making the rise in total test slower. But u also decrease your muscle retention. Its a pretty even trade-off" .

Also, posted was the following:

"When your body's SHBG levels rise, it is usually accompanied by a rise in total test. I think the 2 main issues after a cycle is getting your balls to respond on one hand (that's what HCG is for), and downregulating estrogen on the other hand (clomid and/or nolva, to each his own)".

What is your response to this???
 
McBane said:
I've already stated my opinion on bb.com but just for shits I'll say it here.

I am still yet to see a SINGLE study backing up Nelson's ideas. That's where I run into problems. I think we can all agree that a few testimonials don't amount to much. While you have some problems with some of the studies I've put up over on bb.com, like I've said there are problems with every study. Unless you specifically conduct a study for your specific purposes then it is not 100% applicable. However if there are study after study that shows supports the same point can make fairly accurate inferences. I mean there are lots of studies out there that show clomid raises LH, FSH and testosterone levels, which is why we take clomid to begin with.....I am yet to see studies that show otherwise, hence I don't really see how one can even make an argument otherwise.

Well... Somethings just don't require studies. I don't need a study to tell me how HCG works to increase testosterone production in the testes... I mean, I'm sure I could get some... post them up... but if I did that on every post, where I stated something like that... it would get out of hand.

As for Nelson's ideas... there may not BE any studies on his thoughts yet!!! Think about it. 1000 years ago... men were CONVINCED the world was flat. In 1400, the inhabitents of Tenochtitlán believed if they did not sacrifice food (and sometimes humans) to the gods... the sun would not raise in the morning.

Sometimes... this is how things start... an idea. A sparked idea... along with some common sense and the understanding of a body's chemistry...

I'm not telling everyone to jump on Nelson's boat and praise his word as absolute fact. But don't dismiss it as complete garbage. He HAS experimented with this stuff... which to me is better than any study on some Guinnie Pig in a cage.

Some studies sound really good... I remember one that said smoking caused cancer in monkeys in a one-year period... if you simply read the study, and not the process behind the study (got to dig deeper into the footnotes for that) you'd think... "wow... smoking will kill you in a year!" --- little did the reader know, that 30-40% of the monkey's air supply, for 8-10 hours a day, consisted of cigerette smoke. I'm surprised that the monkey didn't die of smoke inhailation.

Studies are great. What I would prefer... would be to compare the body's chemistry... to how the AAS or compound reacts to it. (i.e., how receptors react... etc etc etc)...

C-ditty
 
Juice Authority said:


Well, here's one I'd like to get Nelson's take on...

Abstract 798 MSSE Suppl 2000

Pharmaceutical intervention of anabolic steroid induced hypogonadism – our success at restoration of the hpg axis

Scally C, Street C

High-dose anabolic-androgenic steroid (AAS) administration results in hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (HH). Physical manifestations can include one or more of the following: depression, decreased sexual desire, impotence, feelings of apathy, testicular atrophy, and loss of muscle mass and strength. Due to feedback inhibition, laboratory values drop well below established physiologic norms: leutinizing hormone (LH) > 3.6 IU/L, follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) > 2.25 IU/L, and testosterone y 300 ng/dL. A search of the literature reveals an absence of studies dealing specifically with AAS-induced HH, and restoration of normal endocrine function.
We report on two interesting cases of AAS using bodybuilders who were brought out of the hypogonadal state. Blood samples were taken in the morning for both subjects and analysed using chemiluminescence (Quest diagnostics, Irving, TX). Post therapy samples were taken 15 days after the last HCG injection.

Case I: 6’0’’ 206 lbs., 33 years old Caucasian male with a 10+ year history of steroid-administration for bodybuilding and Powerlifting. By his own admission he was a “heavy” user, taking from 500 mg/week to 2+ grams/week. Pre-treatment values: LH>1.0 IU/L, T 191 ng/dL. One course of therapy (32 days) was given: 2,500 IU of HCG every 4 days (8 injections total), 50 mg clomifen bid and 10 mg tamoxifen qd. Despite massive drug use patient was an exceptionally good responder. Post-treatment values: LH 5.2 IU/L, T 1072 ng/dL.

Case 2: 5’10’’ 184 lbs, 36 years old Caucasian male with a 2 year history of continuous nandrolone use (200-400 mg/week). Pre treatment values: LH >1.0 IU/L, T 45 ng/dL. Treatment I (32 days): 2,500 IU HCG every 4 days (8 total), clomifen 50 mg bid, arimidex 1 mg qd. Post values: LH > 1.0 IU/L, T 38 ng/dL. Treatment 2 (60 days): 5,000 IU HCG every 4 days (4 inj. total), followed by 2,500 IU HCG every 4 d (4 inj. total), clomifen (50 mg bid) and tamoxifen (10 mg qd). Post-values: LH > 1.4 IU/L, T 63 ng/dL. Treatment 3 (32 days): 5,000 IU HCG qod (6 inj. total) followed by 2,500 IU HCG qod (6 inj. total) given simultaneously with menotropins 150 IU qod (6 inj. total), clomifen (50 mg bid) and tamoxifen (10 mg bid). Post-values: LH 9.8 IU/L, T 507 ng/dL.
Restoration of the HPG axis, even in severe cases of hypogonadism, is possible with combined therapies and careful monitoring of the patient. With continued popularity of these drugs, long-term androgen deficiency is a health concern for former AAS users.

Well... this is interesting. No Guinnie Pigs here! :)

c-ditty
 
Citru: In both cases the subjects used HCG. That explains that.


I realized that jumping boards was a gargantuan mistake. It's way too time consuming and ultimately pointless. And I don't appreciate Juice Athority snipping bits and pieces of what I said on elite and then throwing it to the wolves over at bb.com, forcing me to chase him around and re-explain myself. He's respectful to me one minute and then when the teen tide turns against me, he disses me. High school shit.

Not to mention, that board doesn't seem to be interested in debate or theory or even a logical argument. They bicker minutea. It's all about "my cut and paste study is bigger than your cut and paste study."

I've explained where the studies McBaine posted were flawed. I presented cogent, albiet iconclastic arguments as to How I've developed my line of thinking and still...all he says is "post studies."

Here's one. How about a study on the effects of fina on humans? Do any exist? I'm not sure they do since fina isn't intended for human consumtion, but presuming they don't -- does that mean it doesn't work? Sometimes we need to use our obsevation and not just depend on pre-existing information. And how about a little common sense while we're at it? That's a part of what I do and I believe it's important toward gaining a broader perspective. If all you're going to do is paste studies, why don't you all just do your own searches which agree with your point of view and stay off the boards?

I have nothing to gain by warning people of the potential hazards of Clomid or by suggesting other alternatives other than it may be helpful, and it is helpful. Some people appreciate that. Others may say, "that doesn't apply to me" but maybe something else Nelson says does. But when people get belligerent and hostile and turn it into a pissing match, just because a single point of view isn't to their liking, that's when I have to step back and say..."it's not worth it. I have better things to do."

That's why I've always avoided bodybuilding forums and why I'll just stick to Elite from now on. The people, in general are smarter. The mods are more knowledable. There's less commercialism. And the overall tone is much more positive.

And for god's sakes Citruscide, get a damn avatar that makes everyone happy already!
 
Last edited:
Nelson Montana said:

And for god's sakes Citruscide, get a damn avatar that makes everyone happy already!

Someone is bitching about my avatar?? I read a comment about mods taking away avatars... what was that all about??

I thought this was a multi-facited discussion that has changed topics and was just starting to get good. :)

C-ditty
 
Fonz said:




Androgel+Cabergoline is going to be the next generation clomid once they become cheaper and more available. These 2 will NOT cause mood swings...and way less acne.

I'm sure I'll get blasted for even suggesting this, but thats my view.

Fonz

Blasted... no. I'd be curious on your thoughts. I don't like clomid at all either... I think Huck (I MAY be mistaken) is in agreement with Nolva for post cycle therapy as well... at least, that is what I use.

C-ditty
 
Nelson Montana said:
I realized that juping boards was a gargantuan mistake. It's way too time consuming nd ultimately pointless. And I don't appreeciate Juice Athority snipping bits and pieces of what I said on elite and then throwing it to the wolves over at bb.com, forcing me to chase him around and and re-explain myself. He's respectful to me one minute and then when the teen tide turns against me, he disses me. High school shit.

It's high school because when I read your post and disagreed with it I made some inquiries about the statements you made??? That's not disrespecting you. I was trying to get a better understanding of where you're coming from since your theory was contrary to what I know to be true about clomid. There's nothing wrong with cross referencing self-proclaimed "Gurus". If anything it spurs a healthy information-based discussion so people can make more informed decisions instead of using their body as a test pilot for your theories.
 
I'm sorry we upset you Nelson....I see the error of our ways. Asking someone to back up their ideas with evidence is absolutely proposterus. You wouldn't even give a direct answer as to your opinion on what an ideal post cycle was, you said proviron was better than clomid. I said put up a study to show any increase in FSH, LH or testosterone levels. I went through a ton of studies and found nothing.

Your point about fina is a good one, yes there prob aren't many studies in humans with fina....but guess what? There are plenty with clomid. Plenty with males and clomid I might add. I don't think me asking for a couple studies that back up your point is a large request. Earlier you said you had plenty. Basically I think you are afraid to take a stand on a particular post cycle. You make vague comments that leave loopholes for you to switch around your comment.

Again you resort to badmouthing bb.com over on EF. When you are scared to just answer a couple simple questions.

I am not claiming that you are doing this for personal gain Nelson. I don't know why you have the opinions you have and since you won't show any evidence how the hell am I supposed to figure that out?

You say we are bickering by asking for studies? What the hell are we supposed to judge you ideas by? Because you said they were good and they worked for you? I'm sorry but I just don't buy a lot what you say. Until I see some evidence I don't see why I should or anyone else should. You claim you got some great credentials and you talked to lots of pros.....and you claim none of the pros use clomid (which if you checkout Chad's board you will know this is not true)...and then I have heard you say that pros do not know very much, they just have great genetics....so how does the fact that you know what the pros do and you personally have talked to lots of pros give you any credibility?

If you don't want to debate it on bb.com that's fine. I'll debate it here with you. I may seem like a prick following you back to EF to debate this, but I don't like people giving advice that can endanger the health of others. Right now I believe you are doing just this. I'm not saying everything you say is bullshit. But in terms of your ideas on post cycle it just plain endangers the well being of the bros reading it and believing it. You have given no evidence at ALL as to why it is a valid point. I don't see why you think you don't have to back up your ideas, but other people do...and the fact that you get angered and result to shit-talking leads me to believe this is a mere defense mechanism to avoid addressing the subject at hand.

EDIT: Just reread it and sorry I get a little heated but I don't appreciate the fact that Nelson badmouths one of the boards I am on a lot and its members over nothing....there were only a handful of members that replied to that post anyways. I'll refrain from getting heated again, and let the facts speak for themselves.
 
Last edited:
Citrucide I agree with you in regards to the fact that sometimes there aren't studies on some things....but the fact of the matter is, there are studies on clomid showing it works, and not just 1 or 2 or 3, I posted 7 on bb.com that I will cut and paste, and raybravo posted a couple too. There are studies that show proviron is useless in raising FSH and testosterone levels. So I don't see how it could be useful post cycle. My point is, if he was stating opinions on drugs that had not been researched that would be a different story....but these drugs HAVE been researched. I'll post the studies. On bb.com Nelson stated a couple problems with each study pretty much....but I think we can all agree every study has a flaw. These studies weren't conducted to prove my point, so of course they are not completely 100% applicable; however if one sees study after study that keeps showing the same thing, one can infer that one thing is most likely correct. But I'll throw up the studies and you can see for yourselves.
Fonz said:


Going back and forth between boards, and discussing different topics can(and does) become a pain. Don't worry about any flames...they will not happen. I will delete any poster who does.
So, please go ahead and post the pertinent studies and we will discuss them in a civil manner.

Fonz
Thanks Fonz, I'll post them up soon. Got a midterm tomorrow I need to study for.
 
Well I'm taking a break and posting the studies anyways :)

J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1985 Nov;61(5):842-5

Evidence for a role of endogenous estrogen in the hypothalamic control of gonadotropin secretion in men.

Winters SJ, Troen P.

To examine the mechanism by which endogenous estrogens inhibit gonadotropin secretion in men, blood samples were drawn every 10 min for 12 h in five men before and at the completion of 3 weeks of treatment with the estrogen antagonist clomiphene citrate (50 mg twice daily). Samples were analyzed for LH and alpha-subunit by RIA. Clomiphene produced a 3-fold rise in circulating LH levels, which was associated with a 80% increase in pulse frequency and a 70% increase in pulse amplitude. Immunoreactive alpha-subunit secretion was also pulsatile before and after clomiphene treatment. Mean alpha-levels rose 70%, together with a 39% increase in pulse frequency and a 41% increase in pulse amplitude. Circulating testosterone and estradiol levels increased 2-fold and FSH levels increased 3-fold after clomiphene treatment. Insofar as each LH and uncombined alpha-subunit pulse reflects a LHRH secretory episode, our data indicate that endogenous estrogens tonically restrain the hypothalamic release of LHRH. From these results and those of previous studies, we conclude that estrogens as well as androgens are important in the testicular feedback inhibition of the hypothalamic oscillator that governs pulsatile gonadotropin secretion.


J Androl 1991 Jul-Aug;12(4):258-63

The effects of normal aging on the response of the pituitary-gonadal axis to chronic clomiphene administration in men.

Tenover JS, Bremner WJ.

Department of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle.

Serum androgens decline with age in normal men, despite normal or elevated bioactive serum gonadotropins, suggesting that primary testicular dysfunction occurs with aging. The authors further assessed the question of age-related testicular dysfunction by evaluating whether raising serum gonadotropins above the normal serum range for an extended time in healthy elderly men might result in bringing their gonadal function to a level similar to that found in young adult men. Five elderly (65 to 85 years old) and five young adult men (26 to 33 years old) were given 50 mg of clomiphene citrate (CC) twice a day for 8 weeks to stimulate gonadotropin production. During that time, testosterone (T), non-sex hormone-binding globulin bound T, and estradiol increased significantly in both age groups, while serum inhibin increased significantly only in the young adult men. The increases in serum androgens with CC administration were significantly greater in the young adult men than in the elderly men. These hormone changes occurred in the setting of serum gonadotropins that increased significantly in both age groups, although there was a tendency for the elderly men to have a smaller increase in luteinizing hormone. Despite 8 weeks of stimulation of the pituitary-gonadal axis by CC administration, the elderly men demonstrated significantly diminished testicular responses compared with the young adult men. Sertoli cell function, as determined by inhibin production, was more diminished in the elderly men than was Leydig cell function. These data strengthen the hypothesis that normal aging in men is accompanied by a decline in testicular function.


Urology 1991 Oct;38(4):317-22

Possible hypothalamic impotence. Male counterpart to hypothalamic amenorrhea?

Guay AT, Bansal S, Hodge MB.

Section of Endocrinology, Lahey Clinic Medical Center, Burlington, Massachusetts.

Twenty-one men with erectile complaints who were found to have a low level of serum testosterone without a reciprocal elevation of the serum levels of luteinizing hormone were evaluated to identify whether the defect was of hypothalamic or of pituitary origin. Patients underwent a luteinizing hormone (LH)-follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH)-releasing hormone stimulation test that showed a normal but sluggish increase in LH and FSH levels, thus ruling out a pituitary defect and suggesting a suprapituitary abnormality. This was confirmed when, in response to clomiphene, patients had a normal increase in gonadotropin and testosterone levels. Although the basal as well as clomiphene and gonadotropin releasing hormone-stimulated levels of total testosterone and gonadotropins were identical in men less than and more than fifty years old, the elevation of free testosterone levels in response to clomiphene was higher in patients younger than fifty. This suggested that although the primary abnormality found in these patients is altered secretion of gonadotropin hormone-releasing hormone from the hypothalamus, an age-related decline in the responsivity of Leydig cells to LH may make it more manifest in older patients. Elevation of testosterone levels from a subnormal to a normal range in response to clomiphene administered for seven days suggests that the defect is functional and reversible and that the drug may be useful in treatment of sexual dysfunction in this group of patients.
Nephron 1993;63(4):390-4

Effect of clomiphene citrate on hormonal profile in male hemodialysis and kidney transplant patients.

Martin-Malo A, Benito P, Castillo D, Espinosa M, Burdiel LG, Perez R, Aljama P.

Department of Nephrology, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofia, Cordoba, Spain.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of clomiphene citrate (CC) therapy in the hypothalamus-pituitary-gonadal axis of male uremic subjects. Thirty-four patients on hemodialysis (HD) and 8 successful kidney transplant subjects (RT) were evaluated. Nine healthy males were used as controls (C). At baseline, zinc, testosterone (TEST), prolactin (PRL), FSH, LH and estradiol plasma concentrations were measured. All subjects were treated with CC (100 mg/day) for a week. The aforementioned parameters were determined again on the seventh day of CC therapy, and 3 days after drug withdrawal. Following CC, there was a rise in FSH, LH and TEST levels in all subjects (p < 0.05); it is interesting to stress that TEST became normal in HD. In addition, we observed a decrease of PRL after CC only in HD patients (p < 0.01). In summary, CC was able to partially correct most of the hormonal disturbances of the gonadal axis in uremic patients.


Fertil Steril 2003 Jan;79(1):203-5 Related Articles, Links


Use of clomiphene citrate to reverse premature andropause secondary to steroid abuse.

Tan RS, Vasudevan D.

Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Texas Health Sciences Center, Houston, Texas 77030, USA. [email protected]

OBJECTIVE: To report a case of symptomatic hypogonadism induced by the abuse of multiple steroid preparations that was subsequently reversed by clomiphene. DESIGN: Case report. SETTING: University-affiliated andrology practice within family practice clinic. PATIENT(S): A 30-year-old male. INTERVENTION(S): Clomiphene citrate, 100-mg challenge for 5 days, followed by treatment at same dose for 2 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Clinical symptoms, androgen decline in aging male questionnaire, total T, FSH, LH. RESULT(S): [/b]Reversal of symptoms, normalization of T levels with LH surge, restoration of pituitary-gonadal axis. [/b]CONCLUSION(S): Clomiphene citrate is used typically in helping to restore fertility in females. This represents the first case report of the successful use of clomiphene to restore T levels and the pituitary-gonadal axis in a male patient. The axis was previously shut off with multiple anabolic steroid abuse.

Fertil Steril 1997 Apr;67(4):783-5


Comment in:
Fertil Steril. 1997 Oct;68(4):745.

Idiopathic hypogonadotropic hypogonadism in a male runner is reversed by clomiphene citrate.

Burge MR, Lanzi RA, Skarda ST, Eaton RP.

University of New Mexico School of Medicine, Department of Medicine/Endocrinology-5ACC, Albuquerque 87131, USA.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of estrogen antagonist therapy on the function of the hypothalamic-pituitary-testicular axis in a young male runner with significant morbidity attributable to idiopathic hypogonadotropic hypogonadism. DESIGN: An uncontrolled case study. SETTING: The outpatient endocrinology clinic of a university tertiary referral center. PATIENT(S): A 29-year-old male who has run 50 to 90 miles per week since 15 years of age and who presented with a pelvic stress fracture, markedly decreased bone mineral density, and symptomatic hypogonadotropic hypogonadism. INTERVENTION(S): Clomiphene citrate (CC) at doses up to 50 mg two times per day over a 5-month period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Serum concentrations of LH, FSH, and T before and after CC therapy, as well as clinical indicators of gonadal function. RESULT(S): Barely detectable levels of LH and FSH associated with hypogonadal levels of T were restored to the normal range with CC therapy. The patient experienced improved erectile function, increased testicular size and sexual hair growth, and an improved sense of well being. CONCLUSION(S): Exercise-induced hypogonadotropic hypogonadism exists as a clinical entity among male endurance athletes, and CC may provide a safe and effective treatment option for males with debilitating hypogonadism related to endurance exercise.

PMID: 9093212 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

: J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1995 Dec;80(12):3546-52 Related Articles, Links


Effect of raising endogenous testosterone levels in impotent men with secondary hypogonadism: double blind placebo-controlled trial with clomiphene citrate.

Guay AT, Bansal S, Heatley GJ.

Section of Endocrinology, Lahey Clinic, Burlington, Massachusetts 01805, USA.

Secondary hypogonadism is not an infrequent abnormality in older patients presenting with the primary complaint of erectile dysfunction. Because of the role of testosterone in mediating sexual desire and erectile function in men, these patients are usually treated with exogenous testosterone, which, while elevating the circulating androgens, suppresses gonadotropins from the hypothalamic-pituitary axis. The response of this form of therapy, although extolled in the lay literature, has usually not been effective in restoring or even improving sexual function. This failure of response could be the result of suppression of gonadotropins or the lack of a cause and effect relationship between sexual function and circulating androgens in this group of patients. Further, because exogenous testosterone can potentially increase the risk of prostate disease, it is important to be sure of the benefit sought, i.e. an increase in sexual function. In an attempt to answer this question, we measured the hormone levels and studied the sexual function in 17 patients with erectile dysfunction who were found to have secondary hypogonadism. This double blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study consisted of treatment with clomiphene citrate and a placebo for 2 months each. Similar to our previous observations, LH, FSH, and total and free testosterone levels showed a significant elevation in response to clomiphene citrate over the response to placebo. However, sexual function, as monitored by questionnaires and nocturnal penile tumescence and rigidity testing, did not improve except for some limited parameters in younger and healthier men. The results confirmed that there can be a functional secondary hypogonadism in men on an out-patient basis, but correlation of the hormonal status does not universally reverse the associated erectile dysfunction to normal, thus requiring closer scrutiny of claims of cause and effect relationships between hypogonadism and erectile dysfunction.

Publication Types:
Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial

PMID: 8530597 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


This one is thanks to raybravo:
Abstract 798 MSSE Suppl 2000

Pharmaceutical intervention of anabolic steroid induced hypogonadism – our success at restoration of the hpg axis

Scally C, Street C

High-dose anabolic-androgenic steroid (AAS) administration results in hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (HH). Physical manifestations can include one or more of the following: depression, decreased sexual desire, impotence, feelings of apathy, testicular atrophy, and loss of muscle mass and strength. Due to feedback inhibition, laboratory values drop well below established physiologic norms: leutinizing hormone (LH) > 3.6 IU/L, follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) > 2.25 IU/L, and testosterone y 300 ng/dL. A search of the literature reveals an absence of studies dealing specifically with AAS-induced HH, and restoration of normal endocrine function.
We report on two interesting cases of AAS using bodybuilders who were brought out of the hypogonadal state. Blood samples were taken in the morning for both subjects and analysed using chemiluminescence (Quest diagnostics, Irving, TX). Post therapy samples were taken 15 days after the last HCG injection.

Case I: 6’0’’ 206 lbs., 33 years old Caucasian male with a 10+ year history of steroid-administration for bodybuilding and Powerlifting. By his own admission he was a “heavy” user, taking from 500 mg/week to 2+ grams/week. Pre-treatment values: LH>1.0 IU/L, T 191 ng/dL. One course of therapy (32 days) was given: 2,500 IU of HCG every 4 days (8 injections total), 50 mg clomifen bid and 10 mg tamoxifen qd. Despite massive drug use patient was an exceptionally good responder. Post-treatment values: LH 5.2 IU/L, T 1072 ng/dL.

Case 2: 5’10’’ 184 lbs, 36 years old Caucasian male with a 2 year history of continuous nandrolone use (200-400 mg/week). Pre treatment values: LH >1.0 IU/L, T 45 ng/dL. Treatment I (32 days): 2,500 IU HCG every 4 days (8 total), clomifen 50 mg bid, arimidex 1 mg qd. Post values: LH > 1.0 IU/L, T 38 ng/dL. Treatment 2 (60 days): 5,000 IU HCG every 4 days (4 inj. total), followed by 2,500 IU HCG every 4 d (4 inj. total), clomifen (50 mg bid) and tamoxifen (10 mg qd). Post-values: LH > 1.4 IU/L, T 63 ng/dL. Treatment 3 (32 days): 5,000 IU HCG qod (6 inj. total) followed by 2,500 IU HCG qod (6 inj. total) given simultaneously with menotropins 150 IU qod (6 inj. total), clomifen (50 mg bid) and tamoxifen (10 mg bid). Post-values: LH 9.8 IU/L, T 507 ng/dL.
Restoration of the HPG axis, even in severe cases of hypogonadism, is possible with combined therapies and careful monitoring of the patient. With continued popularity of these drugs, long-term androgen deficiency is a health concern for former AAS users. Further research is needed in this area.



Nelson stated some probs with some of these studies, and I had rebuttles to his arguments, some of the problems seemed sort of nit-picky to me, but before I go and cut and paste my rebuttles I let you guys take a look at them and see what you think of them. BTW tomorrow I'll post the studies on proviron.
 
Thank you for posting the studies McBane...

I look forward to a response. :)

C-ditty
 
McBaie said: How am I supposed to accept an idea unless you post a study?
............................................

Hmmm, let's see... How about logic? Deduction? Reasoning? Personal evidence? The evidence of hundreds of other people? Drawing conclusions based on facts? Insight? Rationality?

You see you just aren't getting this, and you won't admit you don't WANT to get it.

You and a handful of discontents over at bb.com are so hell bent on proving me wrong that you aren't listening. You're essentially shouting over anything I say. Then you stand back and say "Tell us what we want to hear or else!"

You can't learn if all you want to do is talk. One cannot get a point across to another who is unwilling to see the logic of it.

To tell you the truth, I'm bored and disgusted of repeating myself on this issue. When people like JA and McBaine start in, it's like trying to conduct a clinic where you hand a microphone to two hecklers in the audience. There's no way anything of value will come of it.

I feel I've earned a bit of credibility in this industry and I have something to offer and there are those who have taken my advice with the intention with which it was meant and decided for themselves. Some may choose to disregard it, but isn't it funny that the people who took the advice found out that it was right all along? Hmmm.

If you're search happy, you can peruse this board. I know there have been studies on the negative effects of Clomid. But again, before gravity was explained scientifically, it still existed. Juice and McBain, do you understand that concept?

This is hard to say, but it's been coming for a while now...

Since I've been a member at Elite, I've tried to offer as much information as possible on these boards. I don't think anyone can say I've ever been reluctant to help out a bro, explain a position, offer training tips, and answer every PM. But now I must say what I wanted to avoid saying from the first day I came on this board:

From now on, if anyone wants to learn more about this issue, buy my book.

I'm sorry. But this constant badgering is taking a toll. I cannot contribute what I'd like if I'm fighting two and three people at a time.

I doubt if my future posts will be as innocuous as some may like, but it's time for me to realize I don't have time to explain everything to everybody whenever and wherever they want. That's why I wrote my books. My apologies to the other members. Peace.
 
Its obvious Clomid works both in the real world and in the "post a study"(lol) world.
And I'm sure it'll be used for years to come because it is both cheap and easy to acquire. The only 2 problems I have with it, is that it causes acne(In a LOT of cases), mood swings and is a bit slow acting. And if you have 19-nortetesosterone derrivatives in your cycle like Deca and Fina, Clomid works very, very, slowly.
Hence why I'm researching substitutes for Clomid post-cycle that work far quicker and do not cause acne in appreciable amounts.

Fonz
 
Nelson Montana said:
To tell you the truth, I'm bored and disgusted of repeating myself on this issue. When people like JA and McBaine start in, it's like trying to conduct a clinic where you hand a microphone to two hecklers in the audience. There's no way anything of value will come of it.

I feel I've earned a bit of credibility in this industry and I have something to offer and there are those who have taken my advice with the intention with which it was meant and decided for themselves. Some may choose to disregard it, but isn't it funny that the people who took the advice found out that it was right all along? Hmmm.

Since I've been a member at Elite, I've tried to offer as much information as possible on these boards. I don't think anyone can say I've ever been reluctant to help out a bro, explain a position, offer training tips, and answer every PM. But now I must say what I wanted to avoid saying from the first day I came on this board:

Nelson...

You're turning this into a personal thing. I can't speak for McBane but I personally never said anything to bash your as a person nor have I suggested that you don't go out of your way to help people out. You are very knowledgeable in certain areas. A good example of that is the passage below wirtten by you. I made this a sticky over at A-A where I'm a Mod.

"A Primer For The Fledgling Juicehead - Courtsey of Nelson!

(And something to piss off just about everyone)

1)...Steroids aren't as dangerous as they've been made out to be.

This is mostly media sensationalism geared toward a paranoid populice.

2)...Steroid's aren't as benign as they've been made out to be.

Since the dangers have been exagerated, people tend to think none exist. They do. And they're serious.

3)...There is no such thing as a "cutting" cycle.

Steroids are designed to repair muscle tissue. They are growth drugs. True, more muscle allows you burn more fat, but steroids will do little to get you lean. Drugs like Winstrol increase glucose deposition and don't cause water retention, giving the illusion of leanness, but it's just that -- and illusion that will quickly fade. Burning more calories than you take in is what gets you cut.

4)...The amount of weight you want to gain from steroids is irrelevant.

The body will only hold onto so much weight, no matter ow much you do or how long you do it. So when someone says "I want to gain 20 pounds" your body is thinking, "Yeah...whatever."

5)...Bridging is simply "not coming off."

This is denial, plain and simple. You never know how well a cycle went until you've been off for at least a month -- off of EVERYTHING.

6)...Higher dosages cause more suppression.

Don't buy into the "you're suppressed anyway, so it doesn't matter" mentality. The more you take, the longer you'll be suppressed.

7)...Long cycles are a waste of time.

This is an ego/vanity thing. People love staying on and staying huge. But once you're off, your natural testosterone level (and the increase in cortisol) will not allow the body to hold onto the added muscle. However, since the body likes to maintain homeostasis
it will attempt to hold on to the weight -- in the form of fat.

...Stacking more than three drugs is superfluous.

Essentially all steroids are based on the testosterone molecule but some have a higher anabolic nature. Taking 2 or 3 or 4 drugs that are all highly androgenic, is simply taking "more of the same thing." The body doesn't have "cypionate recptors" and "sustanon receptors." This "stacking" concept is pusedo science form the 80's that never went away.

9)...If you can't afford what's good, don't do anything at all.

When people bargain shop for steroids it reminds me of the guy who buys a $100 toupee because he can't afford one that cost $1000. Then he walks around looking like he has a racoon on hs head. He'd be better off bald. Some things just aren't condusive to "bargains" and steroids head the list. These are chemicals that are entering your bloodstream! Respect you body! How many more posts do we have to read about that speak of the side effects from crappy gear? Go with the good stuff, or go it alone.

10)...Anti-e's are undependable, hinder gains and cause worse libido problems and incresed lipid profiles than steroids in many individuals.

Learn to do without them. If you need anti-e's it's a sure sign you're not constructing the most efficaceous cycles.

And don't forget; you can never be too careful when it comes to your health, and you can never be too cautious when it comes to the law."

In closing, why don't we just agree to disagree on the clomid thing. You feel Proviron is better than clomid post-cycle but you're reasoning for that is incorrect. You feel Clomid does NOT increase testosterone and we posted studies that prove that does. What more do you want? I don't get it. Once you take a position on something you become close-minded to the truth.
 
Fonz said:
Its obvious Clomid works both in the real world and in the "post a study"(lol) world.
And I'm sure it'll be used for years to come because it is both cheap and easy to acquire. The only 2 problems I have with it, is that it causes acne(In a LOT of cases), mood swings and is a bit slow acting. And if you have 19-nortetesosterone derrivatives in your cycle like Deca and Fina, Clomid works very, very, slowly.
Hence why I'm researching substitutes for Clomid post-cycle that work far quicker and do not cause acne in appreciable amounts.

Fonz

Fonz, taking Arimidex post-cycle with clomid helps with the acne. With Arimidex you have less edema,bloat,and acne. It helps keep my oil production down, which reduces the post-cycle acne many experience with clomid.
 
I'm going to go out on a limb here... I've read various places people saying that clomid stimulates LH production which would lead to an increase in testosterone. But I've also read that clomid doesn't necessiarly stimulate the hypo and pitu gland, but by blocking the estrogen... it allows them to recover.

Now, by blocking the estrogen... that could cause the testosterone levels to be higher, in ratio to what they were before...

I'm just throwing this out here... it's kind of the support for my Use Nolva/Clomid post cycle... as they both competitively bind ot estrogen receptors... thereby allowing the hypo and pitu to recover.

Not sure how proviorn plays into it...

C-ditty
 
Juice Authority said:


Fonz, taking Arimidex post-cycle with clomid helps with the acne. With Arimidex you have less edema,bloat,and acne. It helps keep my oil production down, which reduces the post-cycle acne many experience with clomid.

True enough. People still get acne though. The number is significant enough to have piqued my interest.
Also endo test still recovers way, way slower after Deca and Fina.
Even with the use of arimidex.

Fonz
 
Citruscide said:
I'm going to go out on a limb here... I've read various places people saying that clomid stimulates LH production which would lead to an increase in testosterone. But I've also read that clomid doesn't necessiarly stimulate the hypo and pitu gland, but by blocking the estrogen... it allows them to recover.

Now, by blocking the estrogen... that could cause the testosterone levels to be higher, in ratio to what they were before...

I'm just throwing this out here... it's kind of the support for my Use Nolva/Clomid post cycle... as they both competitively bind ot estrogen receptors... thereby allowing the hypo and pitu to recover.

Not sure how proviorn plays into it...

C-ditty

Have you seen these links?

http://magazine.mindandmuscle.net/magmain.php?issueID=6&pageID=72

http://magazine.mindandmuscle.net/magmain.php?issueID=7&pageID=77

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.
 
Juice Authority said:


Nelson...


Why don't we just agree to disagree on the clomid thing. You feel Proviron is better than clomid post-cycle but you're reasoning for that is incorrect. You feel Clomid does NOT increase testosterone and we posted studies that prove that does. What more do you want? I don't get it. Once you take a position on something you become close-minded to the truth.
............................................

Why is my reasoning incorrect? Because you posted a few flawed studies that used either one subject, or subjets with kidney disease or elderly people? No numbers were stated on some of those studies. It would say something like "A two fold increase" Well a T level of 20 to 40 is a two-fold increase but it's hardly substancial. But hey, it's a study with big words and lots of numbers so it's irrefutable proof! Try reading them sometimes.

And besides; AND READ THIS NEXT
SENTENCE CAREFULLY!!! I never, ever said Clomid didn't work on some people. In fact, I've gone out of my way to make this point over and over and over and over and over again. And what's the response? "Nelsons says clomid doesnt work. He sucks."

My stance was that clomid doesn't work for everybody, s overused, and may hinder gains (which is actually a seperate subject) But that wasn;t good enough. You had to turn it into a "Nelson is losing" debate. Hurray for bodybuildig.com!

I stated clearly in McBaines post that there are different points of view on this, but he had too much of a hardon to let it go.

You know, fuck this. You're right. Happy?
 
Juice Authority said:


Nelson...


Why don't we just agree to disagree on the clomid thing. You feel Proviron is better than clomid post-cycle but you're reasoning for that is incorrect. You feel Clomid does NOT increase testosterone and we posted studies that prove that does. What more do you want? I don't get it. Once you take a position on something you become close-minded to the truth.
............................................

Why is my reasoning incorrect? Because you posted a few flawed studies that used either one subject, or subjets with kidney disease or elderly people? No numbers were stated on some of those studies. It would say something like "A two fold increase" Well a T level of 20 to 40 is a two-fold increase but it's hardly substancial. But hey, it's a study with big words and lots of numbers so it's irrefutable proof! Try reading them sometimes.

And besides; AND READ THIS NEXT
SENTENCE CAREFULLY!!! I never, ever said Clomid didn't work on some people. In fact, I've gone out of my way to make this point over and over and over and over and over again. And what's the response? "Nelsons says clomid doesnt work. He sucks."

My stance was that clomid doesn't work for everybody, s overused, and may hinder gains (which is actually a seperate subject) But that wasn;t good enough. You had to turn it into a "Nelson is losing" debate. Hurray for bodybuildig.com!

I stated clearly in McBaines post that there are different points of view on this, but he had too much of a hardon to let it go.

You know, fuck this. You're right. Happy?
 
Juice Authority said:




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.

This statement is absolutely wrong.

Novaldex raise testosterone levels?

No.

All it does is block estrogen from latching onto its receptors.
And since tamoxifen is a weak estrogen, the end result is lowered
estrogen(The body perceives lowered estrogen. The actual more potent endo estrogen is still being produced. It just is not able to latch on to its receptors because the tamoxifen is there). It in no way increases testosterone levels. Alll it does is improve the Test/estrogen anabolic ratio by reducing estrogen. Therefore, improving overral anabolicity.

Fonz
 
Fonz...I was askign C- ditty if he read those links before. Did I say that I agreed with their conclusions?
 
Juice Authority said:
Fonz...I was askign C- ditty if he read those links before. Did I say that I agreed with their conclusions?

No.

(And I just double-posted)...lol

EF ois getting squirrely on me. :)

Fonz
 
I plan use both Nolva and Clomid post-cycle. According to Big Cat and some others Clomid at 150 mg slightly outperformed Nolvadex at 20 mg, and seemed to increase SHBG which may be beneficial in reducing androgen related supression. But it also caused visual damage long term, and acted as estrogen at the height of the pituitary. By using Nolvadex alongside it we can reduce the dose of clomid to avoid visual problems and block its estrogenic effect at the pituitary since it is the stronger of the two. And it has the added benefit of increasing LH responsiveness to GnRH.

The plan is to use Nolvadex at a steady 20 mg per day from the last week of the cycle through the end of post-cycle and clomid starting 1-2 weeks after the end of the cycle at 100 mg per day initially, then lowering to 50 mg.
 
Juice Authority said:
Fonz...I was askign C- ditty if he read those links before. Did I say that I agreed with their conclusions?

I haven't read the links before. But they were a decent read.

I drew my conclusions on nolva/clomid based on various drug profiles I've read on them (that explained how they worked), and several members explinations on them...

I was trying to suggest that Clomid might have the effect of raising testosterone by limiting the amount of estrogen... thereby allowing the recovery of the hypothalimus and pituatary. Maybe someone said that, in a study somewhere... but I haven't really invested more than a common sense analysis of it.

Clomid blocks receptors, Nolva blocks receptors... post-cycle, by blocking the receptors, they allow the hypo/pitu to get back "online" by inhibiting the estrogen.

C-ditty
 
I structured my post-cycle rountine around this discussion posted by Big Cat:

The choice of a Tamoxifen/clomiphene/spironolactone combination

The choice for a tamoxifen/Clomiphene combo is primarily because of two factors. Only one relevant study (1) came up as far as recovery after a stack of products (testosterone and nandrolone) was used for twelve weeks, utilized HCG and both clomiphene and tamoxifen to achieve a complete recovery of the HPTA to acceptable levels in 45 days. The second reason is the raging war over which is the better post-cycle drug, clomiphene or tamoxifen has lead to several conclusions. The first is that while 150 mg of clomiphene and 20 mg of tamoxifen have lead to roughly a similar increase in LH levels (17) , but that with the high dosing of clomiphene over time there are certain disadvantages. Such as that it may damage eyesight and may act as a weak estrogen (18) in undesirable places (like the pituitary). So using tamoxifen alongside it will allow us to lower the dose and decrease the chance of these side-effects and add the distinct benefit that Tamoxifen (being the stronger of the two) will prevent the clomiphene from exerting any much influence at the pituitary, and that it will increase LH responsiveness to GnRH (17) where Clomiphene does not. Clomiphene is still used as it seems to offer other advantages, such as an increase in SHBG (19), which may seem like a bad thing at first, but which may decrease androgen-related negative feedback and may thus be in our advantage.

Regardless of the final outcome I feel I have settled the dispute, at least in my own head. Why bother figuring it out when we can use both, limit any negative effects and reap the proven benefits of full recovery ? I used to run tamoxifen slightly less long than clomiphene, but given the suppressive effects of the latter at the pituitary, I later decided it wiser to continue running tamoxifen as long as the clomiphene.
 
Juice Authority said:
I structured my post-cycle rountine around this discussion posted by Big Cat:

The choice of a Tamoxifen/clomiphene/spironolactone combination

The choice for a tamoxifen/Clomiphene combo is primarily because of two factors. Only one relevant study (1) came up as far as recovery after a stack of products (testosterone and nandrolone) was used for twelve weeks, utilized HCG and both clomiphene and tamoxifen to achieve a complete recovery of the HPTA to acceptable levels in 45 days. The second reason is the raging war over which is the better post-cycle drug, clomiphene or tamoxifen has lead to several conclusions. The first is that while 150 mg of clomiphene and 20 mg of tamoxifen have lead to roughly a similar increase in LH levels (17) , but that with the high dosing of clomiphene over time there are certain disadvantages. Such as that it may damage eyesight and may act as a weak estrogen (18) in undesirable places (like the pituitary). So using tamoxifen alongside it will allow us to lower the dose and decrease the chance of these side-effects and add the distinct benefit that Tamoxifen (being the stronger of the two) will prevent the clomiphene from exerting any much influence at the pituitary, and that it will increase LH responsiveness to GnRH (17) where Clomiphene does not. Clomiphene is still used as it seems to offer other advantages, such as an increase in SHBG (19), which may seem like a bad thing at first, but which may decrease androgen-related negative feedback and may thus be in our advantage.

Regardless of the final outcome I feel I have settled the dispute, at least in my own head. Why bother figuring it out when we can use both, limit any negative effects and reap the proven benefits of full recovery ? I used to run tamoxifen slightly less long than clomiphene, but given the suppressive effects of the latter at the pituitary, I later decided it wiser to continue running tamoxifen as long as the clomiphene.

Interesting post. Are those footnote markers in his post?

C-ditty
 
Citruscide said:


Interesting post. Are those footnote markers in his post?

C-ditty

One thing about Big Cat, he always backs up his theories with evidence and references to the science. Here's a link to that post with the associated footnote makers.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=113118&highlight=sane+cycle

Footnote markers:

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

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

Adamopoulos, Kapolla et al. The effect of clomiphene citrate on sex hormone binding globulin in normospermic and oligozoospermic men. Int J Androl 4 (1981) 639-45
 
Nelson, Nelson, Nelson.....all I can do it chuckle :)

If you'd like to discuss pure logic then let's. The only negative points you make about clomid is that it raises SHBG levels which ray address:
"you want higher SHBG levels after a cycle, which means more bound test = faster recovery,then low free test leads to a bigger release of LH wich should be a good thing post cycle ,You will have less free test but the total amount of test will be the same. A bigger amount of free test will inhibit LHRH/LH by negative feedback, making the rise in total test slower.
But u also decrease your muscle retention. Its a pretty even trade-off ."

as did macho21:
"I have to agree with you on this one. When your body's SHBG levels rise, it is usually accompanied by a rise in total test. I think the 2 main issues after a cycle is getting your balls to respond on one hand (that's what HCG is for), and downregulating estrogen on the other hand (clomid and/or nolva, to each his own)."

The other points you discuss are vision problems, which I agreed with you! I guess I got rid of that hardon that wasn't letting me let you talk...as you so eloquently put it. Other than that I see no logic, no deduction, no reasoning in your argument except that you have some phantom studies on your server that you can't cut and paste....oh and you have personal experience.

Well there are plenty of people who claim the andro poppers work great for them! Should I believe them too because they said so?

I know you say you've tried out your methods on hundreds of people....but please outline how your experiment was conducted and give us some exact numbers. How do I know YOUR experiment wasn't flawed.

If you have any reasoning besides these I have missed please share and I am happy to oblige.

BTW I agree with the guys who mentioned clomid was insufficient for recovery for a highly suppressive cycle (i.e. deca, fina, etc. or just very long cycles), and I agree HCG should be used in conjunction with nolv/clomid. I also think nolvadex is a fine post cycle drug.....I won't use it alone personally but there is some good evidence supporting it works post cycle. Seems like nolv is best used in conjunction with clomid though.b

Nelson if you are really that upset by me using evidence in my arguments then I will cease to badger you, I think most people would agree my point is proven.

BTW If people here agree with Nelson that those studies I posted are insufficient data because they are flawed please speak up. Nelson brought up a couple points about them being flawed, and apparrently he still believes it. Rather than lead people to believe he is correct that they are flawed, I am more than happy to post why he thought they were flawed and why the "flaw" was relatively insignificant to our discussion in the larger picture, especially since I wasn't using 1 or 2 studies as a crutch.
 
Last edited:
Fonz said:
While thats all said and good. Big Cat has never done AAS or PH's. Thats straight from him. Kind of paints him in a different light IMO.

Link to CEM Thread:

www.cuttingedgemuscle.com/Forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4316&perpage=15&pagenumber=4

Fonz

I want to reopen a can of worms between the two of you. The D-bol bridge debate turned into an ego-feeding proposition. Much of this is trial and error and the proof is in the pudding so to speak as each person reacts differently to both AS and anti-e's. I have personally learned a lot from both of you and have incorporated both your practical experience and his research into my cycling and post-cyclying routines.

Something that you posted a while back on Fina I found most intriguing where you stated the following:

"When injected, trenbolone cause a rise in BOTH PGF2A and
PGE2.

PGF2a is what is called the GOOD prostaglandin.
PGE2 is the BAD prostaglandin.

However, the rise of PGF2A > PGE2 by a small margin.

By taking Enteric-coated aspirin(500mg/day) REDUCES
both PGF2A and PGE2 because they are produced
in a 1:1 ratio.

By decreasing PGE2, you reduce the specific prostaglandin
to BASELINE levels(or less again), while PGF2A remains
elevated ABOVE normal levels.

The whole point of this, is that PGE2 levels can play havoc
on your endocronoligal system even though PGF2A
is still greater than PGE2(BUT, PGE2 is still above baseline
normal levels)."

My understanding from this is that Tren raises pgf levels which burns fat, which I agree since I eat like a pig on it and dont put on much fat.
 
Juice Authority said:


One thing about Big Cat, he always backs up his theories with evidence and references to the science. Here's a link to that post with the associated footnote makers.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=113118&highlight=sane+cycle

Footnote markers:

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

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

Adamopoulos, Kapolla et al. The effect of clomiphene citrate on sex hormone binding globulin in normospermic and oligozoospermic men. Int J Androl 4 (1981) 639-45

Thanks. I wasn't questioning him... I was just curious to read the entire post. :)

C-ditty
 
McBane said:

BTW If people here agree with Nelson that those studies I posted are insufficient data because they are flawed please speak up. Nelson brought up a couple points about them being flawed, and apparrently he still believes it. Rather than lead people to believe he is correct that they are flawed, I am more than happy to post why he thought they were flawed and why the "flaw" was relatively insignificant to our discussion in the larger picture, especially since I wasn't using 1 or 2 studies as a crutch.

Well... studies are studies. I can't say that the information posted is per se flawed. It looked to be (what like 7 of them?) very good information. But i always like to know what goes into the study... alot of times, the results are listed in detail, while the means are only touched on. I'm not saying that is the case with these studies you proposed, but that is my problem in general.

With everything, Anti-e's included, you can only get a "range" of conclusion from a study. I think you'll agree that 20mg of nolva can effect 2 people differently (meaning, one might need 40mg to gain the same benefit). With that being said, I look at a study as a dart... on the dartboard of information, I take a proverbial 3" around the dart, which would be the coverage area.

If that makes sense... if not... just shoot me. :)

C-ditty
 
Originally posted by Juice Authority

I want to reopen a can of worms between the two of you. The D-bol bridge debate turned into an ego-feeding proposition. Much of this is trial and error and the proof is in the pudding so to speak as each person reacts differently to both AS and anti-e's. I have personally learned a lot from both of you and have incorporated both your practical experience and his research into my cycling and post-cyclying routines.


Response:

I agree completely. It is trial and error. I just find it funny that somebody who has never tried AAS or even PH's could respond with such finality to the idea, even though it has been in use for well over 20 years.




Something that you posted a while back on Fina I found most intriguing where you stated the following:

"When injected, trenbolone cause a rise in BOTH PGF2A and
PGE2.

PGF2a is what is called the GOOD prostaglandin.
PGE2 is the BAD prostaglandin.

However, the rise of PGF2A > PGE2 by a small margin.

By taking Enteric-coated aspirin(500mg/day) REDUCES
both PGF2A and PGE2 because they are produced
in a 1:1 ratio.

By decreasing PGE2, you reduce the specific prostaglandin
to BASELINE levels(or less again), while PGF2A remains
elevated ABOVE normal levels.

The whole point of this, is that PGE2 levels can play havoc
on your endocronoligal system even though PGF2A
is still greater than PGE2(BUT, PGE2 is still above baseline
normal levels)."

My understanding from this is that Tren raises pgf levels which burns fat, which I agree since I eat like a pig on it and dont put on much fat.

Response:

This idea was first was first initiated by Huck. And it intrigued me.
Tren reduces cortisone levels dramatically.(Therefore protein degradation). And is the chief reason why its such a great anti-catabolic AAS.
The bodies feed-back loop to the reduction in cortisone is to reduce thyroid levels. This is in essence trying to reduce the reduction in protein degradation caused by the decrease in cortisone caused by the Fina.

Reduced Thyroid Activity = Reduced Protein Degradation

Which REDUCES Finas anti-glucocorticoid effect by some margin by lowering the possible effects of Fina on protein catabolism if the thyroid were at FULL strength..

Now, decreased thyroid levels should in theory LOWER body temperature. But on Fina, this does not happen.

Why?

Simple thermodynamic principle. The energy has to come from somewhere.
Prostaglandins are incredibly thermogenic. And can make up for the reduced thyroid levels, in terms of body temperature.
If Fina did indeed increased prostaglandins, its effects on fat loss would be pronounced(True) and its effects on Pumps(Hypertrophy) would be pronounced as well(True).

Obviously, this all speculation w/o actual measurements...but the theory does make sense.

If you have ever used Tren Suspension, you would have felt a VERY sudden increase in Body Temp. This could only come from increased PgF2A levels. This is not really seen in Tren Acetate......but you do get the infamous night sweats(Probably b/c of the longer ester).
And, my theory on the use of aspirin, can actually be improved upon. It does not need to be used. There's a NATURAL compound that can reduce PGE2 levels by a small margin.
(Therefore shifting the prostagladin ratio even MORE in favour of the good prostaglandins(PGf2A))
But thats something that will remain a secret for now.

Also, just as an FYI:

Adding 25mcgs T3/day to a Fina cycle will improve your results in terms of fat loss and msucle gain.
It will do this, by increasing thyroid levels to normal, therefore increasing synthesis of fats(More fat can be used) and proteins(Protein synthesis is increased). All the while FIna will be curbing protein catabolism mind you.

Again, this is my opinion from my experieneces on Fina. I have used Fina for 40 weeks....and have also studied the literature behind it.

I find Trenbolone to be the premier AAS.

Fonz
 
There's no scientific proof, at least not that I've seen, to back this up but it sure makes sense to me. I agree with Fina and PGF. It makes sense to me, especially because of the cough. My pulse is usually higher on Tren, which to me would translate to more calories being burned. I don't think Tren directly burns fat but there does seem to be an indirect link due to its stimulatory affect which in turn may burn more fat.
 
Juice Authority said:
There's no scientific proof, at least not that I've seen, to back this up but it sure makes sense to me. I agree with Fina and PGF. It makes sense to me, especially because of the cough. My pulse is usually higher on Tren, which to me would translate to more calories being burned. I don't think Tren directly burns fat but there does seem to be an indirect link due to its stimulatory affect which in turn may burn more fat.

Another indicator, is that you can lose fat on Trenbolone at a HIGHER caloric intake than other AAS. Have not seen this phenomenon with ANY other AAS. And I have used almost all AAS. This can only be the result of some action of Trenbolone on prostaglandin production.

Fonz
 
Fonz said:
Adding 25mcgs T3/day to a Fina cycle will improve your results in terms of fat loss and msucle gain.
It will do this, by increasing thyroid levels to normal, therefore increasing synthesis of fats(More fat can be used) and proteins(Protein synthesis is increased). All the while FIna will be curbing protein catabolism mind you.

Again, this is my opinion from my experieneces on Fina. I have used Fina for 40 weeks....and have also studied the literature behind it.

I find Trenbolone to be the premier AAS.

Fonz

I've been using NYC's and Yohimbee with Tren and have noticed similar effects to the ones described above. Doesn't T3 have a catabolizing effect to it to where there is decreased muscle gain?
 
Juice Authority said:


I've been using NYC's and Yohimbee with Tren and have noticed similar effects to the ones described above. Doesn't T3 have a catabolizing effect to it to where there is decreased muscle gain?

Adding T3 :Increase in Protein Synthesis + increase in burning of fats + increased protein catabolism

No T3: Smaller protein Synthesis + smaller fat loss + less protein catabolism.

The question is: Is the increased protein synthesis and fat-burning worth the increase in catabolism?

Real world feed-back suggests that it is.

Also, reduced thyroid levels make you sluggish. If you have ever ran Fina by itself, you would have noticed this phenomenon. Adding T3 normally solves this problem.

Fonz
 
Fonz said:
[BAlso, reduced thyroid levels make you sluggish. If you have ever ran Fina by itself, you would have noticed this phenomenon. Adding T3 normally solves this problem.

Fonz [/B]

I usually run Fina with Test so I haven't noticed the sluggish effect you alluded to above.
 
Top Bottom