BBKingpin: That's an awful lot of exclamation points for someone who doesn't care what I think.
But since you asked...
For one thing, the "concensus" you speak of is about 6 people out of thousands. And I think half of them arent really as stupid as they come off, they just like breaking balls. Maybe you're one of them.
THERE ARE MORE THAN 6 ON THIS THREAD ALONE. YOU ARE ALONE ON THIS ONE. WHERE ARE THE THOUSANDS YOU ARE REFERRING TO?
But back to the original point...
Adding a non aromatizing steroid in with a lower dosage of test would make sense if e is a concern. What part of that are you having trouble comprehending?
Extropolating my statements into a scenario of the absurd does not a good analogy make.
And yes, maybe he should work a little harder. Whassa matta ? Are those big bad barbells too heavy-wevy for lil' baby? Who has time for eating extra protein when an injection takes but a few seconds? And you call yourself a bodybuilder?
THE POINT WAS THAT NO MATTER HOW HARD YOU TRAIN AND EAT THE BODY'S SYSTEM OF HOMEOSTASIS IS NEVER GOING TO GET YOU WHERE YOU WANT TO BE WITHOUT THE USE OF STEROIDS. TAKE A LOOK AT ALL OF THE IMPRESSIVE NATURAL BODYBUILDERS. NOT TOO IMPRESSIVE!
A beginner can make great gains with a single shot of sus a week for 4 weeks and he wouldn't need an anti-e. If you and your "consensus" don't know that, or haven't got the guts to train the way you're supposed to, then you shouldn't be giving advice. And you sure as shit shouldn't be knocking mine.
HE MAY OR MAY NOT NEED AN ANTI-E. ONLY TIME WILL TELL. BETTER SAFE THAN SORRY.