Why not test only?

[Deleted member 33117]

After giving it some thought, I've come off of all of my other compounds and am only using prop and letro. With the advent of effect aromatase inhibitors, why do we feel the need to using many of the anabolic compounds that we use, other than immediately pre-contest? For bulking mg per mg, deca and eq do not appear to yield better gains, and often yield less than test. When the issue of $$$ arrises, test is the cheapest compound per mg. Aromatase inhibitors are very easily and cheaply aquired now, and if one is worried about estragenic-related side effects, estragen levels can be lowered slighly, greatly or even almost completely depending on the need of the individual. One seeking the greatest gains may not desire to suppress their estragen to extremely low levels, but one who wishes to look harder and leaner (the goal of many who using more expensive and weaker compounds), may desire them as low as possible.

What about negative effects on one's lipid profile? The milder drugs that are not substraits for the aromatase enzyme, or those that are a weaker substrait than testosterone, have the same effect, so this is hardly an arguement.

Any thoughts or ideas on the subject?

 

[rjl296]

good point, but i love var

 

[SNlPER]

sounds on point to me bro..............

RJ. nice avatar. Number One Stuntaz........... Too Funny.

 

[TheMuscleMonster]

on eq with 20mg of nolva perday i do not have to deal with a single side-effect. i am not as confident that that would be the case with test, sure maybe the gains arent as great but the simplicity and peace of mind i get from using a milder compound i believe makes it more valuable to me.

 

[majutsu]

1. deca, eq, primo and tren are all stronger than test at the anabolic receptor, so you gain more, multiply proven in nitrogen metabolism and dose-result studies.

2. deca (and others), being 5-alpha'd to an inactive substance have little to no androgenic sides, if acne, hair loss, and prostate problems are of concern to you. . .

3. Because of metabolite activities, and varying actions at androgen-, glucocorticoid- and estrogen- receptors, differing stacks of drugs can have widely varying results and sides. For example, a stack of 400deca/400eq/500test will have significantly better results and less sides than 2g test. The cost differential would be negligible too.


The same reasons my diet doesn't consist of one food . . .

 

[mphowells]

on eq with 20mg of nolva perday i do not have to deal with a single side-effect. i am not as confident that that would be the case with test, sure maybe the gains arent as great but the simplicity and peace of mind i get from using a milder compound i believe makes it more valuable to me.

Very good point. From the researching I have done into many of peoples threds, eq has little side effects and for newbies like myself, I think this is important.

 

[Goldprospector]

I think that the main reason that all of the other or exotic compounds are used...especially for beginners is because of trial an error, or at least to see what works best for them. I agree that dollar for dollar, Test is probably best for keepable gains. But we also have to remember that all compounds may not work the same for everyone. Where someone might grow like crazy on 400 EQ per week, others may not. This also goes for Test.
Just MHO

 

[trinidad]

I was actually considering a test only cycle next time around but now got a hold of some QV var to go with it

 

[lartinos]

people act as if anti-e's don't exist. I hear so many people say they won't use test because of bloat. Stupid fockers