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

Short VS Long AAS Cycle... Which is better?

Shrine1

The Resistance
I had a conversation with WPA (who is obviously very knowledgeable) regarding short AAS cycles.. He explained the benefits and how recovery is far more easy on the body when you run short burst of hormomes.

It made sense that during long cycles your lipds take such a hit as well, making you more susceptible to cardio vascular disease in the long run.

It raises valid concerns, but on the flip side of the coin, compounds like primo and eq offer a better return over longer periods of time, which equals lean body mass gains that are more attainable after your Cycles ends.

I want to hear members thoughts on short AAS cycles, why it's better OR.. the benefits of the long cycle and if it's a better overall game plan?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
 
Good question.. 5-6 weeks for the short and the long 10-12 weeks plus.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
 
For a lot of people there is the issue of trying to get the most out of their cycles. If you only have 4 weeks then you see people doing crazy shit with superdrol and other prohormones.. While if it's a longer cycle then it's usually not as full on. Majority of my cycles are test and dbol and maybe something else that I want to experiment with.. I would take a a 12 week test cycle over a 4 week prohormone cycle any day..

Gains are better. 4 weeks isn't long enough so easy come easy go

I feel healthier. Prohormones feel like poison. 8 weeks of tren was nothing compared to 4 weeks of Superdrol.

Improves my skin, mood and libido.

Tons of energy vs feeling like shit

I know I basically just described AAS vs prohormones but few people will run 6 weeks of anything except an oral

Just my opinion though

Sent from my GT-N7100 using EliteFitness
 
Hey bonacris, what are you saying helps your skin, test? It doesn't make me break out or anything but I wouldn't say it helps. As far as short vs long I would say that shorter cycles with certain compounds may be beneficial later in life when natural levels are not as high, but when you're comparing a 6 week cycle to a 10 week cycle I can't imagine the shut down being much more drastic when compared to the gains you would make in those extra 4 weeks. In a day and age when people are cycling half the year I can't imagine a 12 week cycle causing much more problems than a 6 week one, that is as long as you allow time to recover in between. I know that later in life I would either utilize shorter cycles or much lower doses for longer periods. I'm looking forward to seeing others opinions on this subject, good post.
 
I have suffered from acne since I was a teen.. always had a spot or 2 popping up even though I'm 27 now.. but as soon as I start a cycle with test my skin becomes like marble, smooth and clear.. dairy and potato chips are the only things that will make me break out on cycle.

Sorry for getting off topic

Sent from my GT-N7100 using EliteFitness
 
An ongoing debate. I may have been the first person to write about the benefits of short cycles back in 1998 -- Steroids For Health. Back then I said 4 weeks, but I'd stretch that to 6 now. But anything more than 12 weeks will cause far more suppression and far fewer keepable gains in the long run.
 
From my studies, and the experiences I have had so far, I would recommend the shortest possible cycles with the lowest "effective" doses. Mind you, I'm on a 20 week cycle now as this leads me up to a show, but plan on 2 - 12 weeks cycles for next year. Of course "shortest possible" may mean 16 weeks when your talking Primo or Eq.

Another point is, I'm 50 years old and plan on staying on the TRT route, so restoring my natural test system is not the plan, but maintaining overall health is.
 
It depends on the compounds used and overall goals.
I think you can make them both effective if you do
things right.
 
It's all on personal preference in my opinion. The shorter cycles are obviously easier to recover from and there is less strain on your health. I prefer the longer cycles of 12-16 weeks with long esters to maximize the most amount of muscle gain I can, and to be able to use the last half of my cycles to drop bodyfat. It works great for me, but shorter cycles may be ideal for others
 
Both seem to have benefits and upsides. Seems like its more about personal preference though.

My thinking leads me to believe that a PH would be more suitable in terms of time vs a long ester like Test C for 6 weeks. Or would it? Cause as soon as you inject the hormone is in your body.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
 
Duration of esters have absolutely nothing to do with it.

So the actual feeling of "its kicking in" is really not accurate at all then. Because once injected the hormone is active in your body. Correct? At least that's how I took it when having our conversation.

Seems to me the superior option is really the short cycles. You can do more cycles, shorter breaks, and less side effects later down the line

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
 
So the actual feeling of "its kicking in" is really not accurate at all then. Because once injected the hormone is active in your body. Correct? At least that's how I took it when having our conversation.

Seems to me the superior option is really the short cycles. You can do more cycles, shorter breaks, and less side effects later down the line

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

Once it's in it's in. A short ester has a higher concentration quicker and is inert faster. After two weeks, levels even out, whether it's long or short ester. If you want an immediate kick, use an oral for the first week.
 
What is the key to restoring natural T? Just clomid and HCG? Do u run it towards the end of the cycle? And how much?


Sent from my iPhone using EliteFitness.com - Anabolic Steroids, Bodybuilding
 
Top Bottom