Yesterday's post on Test-only cycle

[Nutrient-Nut]

I posted a Q & A post yesterday from Cy Willson (Cyborg). I like his information and responses for the most part, but I disagree with his recommendation to that newbie about taking 1,000 mg of Test for a first cycle. That's good for someone that is advanced, but not for one new to the game. IMO, 500 mg of Test per week should be a max and about 200 mg should be a minimum. After thinking about this, I decided to delete the post, for the best interest of the newbies.

200-500 mg/week of Test for one's first cycle should suffice nicely or you're doing something terribly wrong!

NN

 

[Mike P.T.]

 

[sk*]

1g is fine if that's all he is taking.

-sk

 

[macDbol]

1g is fine if that's all he is taking.

-sk

for a first cycle??

a newbie will grow off half that if done right (even a quarter in some cases)

 

[sk*]

a newbie will grow off half that if done right (even a quarter in some cases)

I tried that, didn't work.

Most suggest the famous test/deca/dbol stack which in combination is above 1g of gear.

-sk

 

[tbro]

IS TEST AND DECA BETTER FOR CUTTING THAN TEST AND TREN?

 

[genarr3]

Smartest thing to do is to start low. See what works for you. This thing is a marathon, not a sprint.

 

[OKIE]

I agree that 1g of T per week for a newbie is excessive. I have many friends who got great gains from 300mg/week for a first cycle. If you don't get gains from 500mg/week for a first cycle, either your diet and/or training is horrid or you don't respond well to gear.

 

[macDbol]

I tried that, didn't work.

Most suggest the famous test/deca/dbol stack which in combination is above 1g of gear.

-sk

probably doing something wrong or your an rare breed, your test levels increase several times over at 500mg a week, something has to happen your first time out

 

[sk*]

probably doing something wrong or your an rare breed, your test levels increase several times over at 500mg a week, something has to happen your first time out

First cycle was 200mg/week of deca and I bumped it up to 400mg for a few weeks in between. Total net gain = 0. I gained a few lbs in the begining 2-3weeks of the cycle but I am not counting that because deca doesn't even kick in in the begining. Diet/supplementation were good.

First cycle is when your receptors are supposedly fresh, why not take advantage of that?

-sk

 

[CanadianBro]

First cycle is when your receptors are supposedly fresh, why not take advantage of that?

-sk

This is incorrect and a long-time myth in bodybuilding.

Testosterone in particular will effect the body of an IFBB Pro pretty much the same as a new user. The difference is that the Pro has years of training under his belt and has simply reached a level where gains are limited no matter which anabolics are used.

Where the novice has a lot of room to grow and therefore will significantly outgain the Professional.

The fact that the receptors have not been exposed to steroids previously really has nothing to do with it.

 

[sk*]

This is incorrect and a long-time myth in bodybuilding.

You're wrong and i'll give you an anology.

If I punch you in the face it will hurt a lot. If I punch you a second time in your face (at the same speed) it will hurt again but a little less. A third time would hurt even less.

Buttom line, you get used to the pain. Same thing with steroids.

-sk

 

[sk*]

Also if you stay on a certain anabolic for an extended of time then you bet your ass your gains will diminish. However, if you take some time off and do the same cycle again then you will gain again.

-sk

 

[macDbol]

You're wrong and i'll give you an anology.

If I punch you in the face it will hurt a lot. If I punch you a second time in your face (at the same speed) it will hurt again but a little less. A third time would hurt even less.

Buttom line, you get used to the pain. Same thing with steroids.

-sk

?????

canadian bro made a good point with the pro-bb and a newbie,,a pro is pretty much tapped out in terms of growth potential, thats why he needs a shit load more gear to: 1. maintain lbm 2. put on extra pounds . A new user hasnt nearly reached that plateu, thus effective dosages dont need to be that high.

 

[sk*]

?????

canadian bro made a good point with the pro-bb and a newbie,,a pro is pretty much tapped out in terms of growth potential, thats why he needs a shit load more gear to: 1. maintain lbm 2. put on extra pounds . A new user hasnt nearly reached that plateu, thus effective dosages dont need to be that high.

I guess you didn't understand my analogy.

Look at the second post I made (above this one), hopefully it will help.

-sk

 

[macDbol]

i get what your saying,,u didnt gain jack off a low to moderate dose of deca on your first time out, but i bet you if we made a poll a vast majority of ppl who did nore more than 250mg of test or 200-300mg deca on their first cycle gained 10+ pounds

 

[sk*]

i get what your saying,,u didnt gain jack off a low to moderate dose of deca on your first time out, but i bet you if we made a poll a vast majority of ppl who did nore more than 250mg of test or 200-300mg deca on their first cycle gained 10+ pounds

Well my deca was above 300mg if you average it out. 250mg of test?? That's basically replacing your natty tests with what's in the vial.

My analogy had nothing to do with what I gained though. Just saying that the body gets used to it and that's what everyone means by "receptors get used to it."

-sk

 

[CanadianBro]

You're wrong and i'll give you an anology.

If I punch you in the face it will hurt a lot. If I punch you a second time in your face (at the same speed) it will hurt again but a little less. A third time would hurt even less.

Buttom line, you get used to the pain. Same thing with steroids.

-sk

Interesting analogy ..... however still incorrect as far as steroids are concerned. Particularly testosterone.

You see, if this were the case, you would see Professional bodybuilder actually decreasing in size. Realize that a professional bodybuilder is on anabolics YEAR AROUND. They NEVER stop. Because if they did, their bodies and lean muscle tissue would dissapear at an incredibly rapid speed.

Their bodies never actually adapt or "get used to" the anabolics in their body as these athletes continue to make consistent and persistent gains (look at Ronnie Coleman over his 4 Mr. Olympia's...he was larger in each one)

The reason the amount of gear is increased is not because the body is getting used to it, rather because that is the amount required to take the athlete to the next level.

It is similar to food intake. The larger you get, the more calories you must consume to grow, correct.

The body never actually gets used to the food and stops processing it. It simply required more food to sustain the growth or achieve increased growth.

Therefore, there should be no concern that the body will get used to the steroid and not grow. It will. However, the amount of growth will be in direct proportion to which stage the athlete is in regarding genetic potential.

A appreciate your feedback SK as this is a very misunderstood topic in the world of bodybuilding.

 

[Stillgoing]

i get what your saying,,u didnt gain jack off a low to moderate dose of deca on your first time out, but i bet you if we made a poll a vast majority of ppl who did nore more than 250mg of test or 200-300mg deca on their first cycle gained 10+ pounds

Absolutely agree.

SK - sure your gear wasn't veggie oil in a pretty little package??

 

[sk*]

Interesting analogy ..... however still incorrect as far as steroids are concerned. Particularly testosterone.

You see, if this were the case, you would see Professional bodybuilder actually decreasing in size. Realize that a professional bodybuilder is on anabolics YEAR AROUND. They NEVER stop. Because if they did, their bodies and lean muscle tissue would dissapear at an incredibly rapid speed.

Their bodies never actually adapt or "get used to" the anabolics in their body as these athletes continue to make consistent and persistent gains (look at Ronnie Coleman over his 4 Mr. Olympia's...he was larger in each one)

The reason the amount of gear is increased is not because the body is getting used to it, rather because that is the amount required to take the athlete to the next level.

It is similar to food intake. The larger you get, the more calories you must consume to grow, correct.

The body never actually gets used to the food and stops processing it. It simply required more food to sustain the growth or achieve increased growth.

Therefore, there should be no concern that the body will get used to the steroid and not grow. It will. However, the amount of growth will be in direct proportion to which stage the athlete is in regarding genetic potential.

A appreciate your feedback SK as this is a very misunderstood topic in the world of bodybuilding.

It is pretty much common knowledge that they increase their dosages from each time, they don't stay on the same amount of gear year round.

Also if you stay on a certain anabolic for an extended period of time then you eventually start to see diminished gains (around the 10th week mark for me). However, if you take some time off and do the same cycle again then you will gain again.

-sk

 

[sk*]

SK - sure your gear wasn't veggie oil in a pretty little package??

No it wasn't fake. Have you actually tried low dosages?

-sk

 

[2new4juice]

i'm on 1cc of test per week(in my 9th week) and have gained 20lbs and lost 1% off my bf. its also my first cycle, which i consider to be a great one.

 

[JKD]

1 g of test would be silly for a new user. Why would you waiste all that money when y ou will get great gains from 400 - 500mgs of test.

 

[CanadianBro]

Also if you stay on a certain anabolic for an extended period of time then you eventually start to see diminished gains (around the 10th week mark for me). However, if you take some time off and do the same cycle again then you will gain again.

-sk

I agree however this is not because the body adapts to the steroid. It is simply because the body required a larger dosage to achieve further results. Keep in mind that the body has surely added quite a bit of lean muscle tissue in this time period and therefore the same amount of anabolics will have much less effect.

Again, this is similar to consuming food. Let's say you take a 10 week cycle and then at the end you do NOT increase your caloric intake. Will you grow? Of course not. You will need to increase the amount of calories and if you increased your calories, you would again begin to grow.

The same with an anabolic cycle. If you continually increase your dosage in proportion to the amount of gains you were making, you would continue to see results long after the 10 week period.

The reason this is not done more often in the bodybuilding community is due to the unecessary stress on the human organs and this should not be accepted by the recreational user.

 

[sk*]

1 g of test would be silly for a new user. Why would you waiste all that money when y ou will get great gains from 400 - 500mgs of test.

You gotta love all the unnecessary repetitious blabber when some of us are actually discussing it based on ideas. At least support what you are saying for fuck's sake. I don't mean to flame but I see it as a flame when someone out of nowhere gives his/her "idea" of one line without supporting when others are actually discussing it.

-sk

 

[sk*]

I agree however this is not because the body adapts to the steroid. It is simply because the body required a larger dosage to achieve further results. Keep in mind that the body has surely addes quite a bit of lean muscle tissue on this time period and therefore the same amount of anabolics will have much less effect.

Again, this is similar to consuming food. Let's say you take a 10 week cycle and then at the end you do NOT increase your caloric intake. Will you grow? Of course not. You will need to up the amount of calories and of if you increased your calories, you would again begin to grow.

The same with an anabolic cycle. If you continually increase your dosage in proportion to the amount of gains you were making, you would continue to see results long after the 10 week period.

The reason this is not done more often is because this can cause unecessary stress on the human organs and this should not be accepted by the recreational user.

Well how come a simple rest in between the two cycles is enough to continue further gains? The break in between the cycles was the point of my last post ...

-sk

 

[CanadianBro]

Well how come a simple rest in between the two cycles is enough to continue further gains? The break in between the cycles was the point of my last post ...

-sk

Yes, the rest will allow you to further gains mainly for 2 reasons:

1. The body has began producing it's own testosterone again and the introduction of an exogeneous anabolic will shock the body. Very similar to changing patterns in training style.

2. You will no doubt have lost some of the gains post-cycle and the body will again be ready for another stage of growth. Remember, the body can only grow so quickly. It must adapt to it's weight, which of course takes time.

You see, the body never actually adapts to the testosterone. It simply needs time to adapt to the mass that has been added. And then of course it will be ready to grow again.

Another key point is that even if you do allow the rest period between the two cycles, you will not gain nearly as much the second time around (this is considering the exact same cycle is used both times).

This is again, due to the fact that the body has grown and requires a larger amount of anabolics to continue the growth.

Excellent and valid questions SK. I appreciate the discussion.

Many of you 'young bucks' are very intelligent as far as using anabolics. I am quite impressed.

 

[sk*]

Yes, the rest will allow you to further gains mainly for 2 reasons:

1. The body has began producing it's own testosterone again and the introduction of an exogeneous anabolic will shock the body. Very similar to changing patterns in training style.

2. You will no doubt have lost some of the gains post-cycle and the body will again be ready for another stage of growth. Remember, the body can only grow so quickly. It must adapt to it's weight, which of course takes time.

You see, the body never actually adapts to the testosterone. It simply needs time to adapt to the mass that has been added. And then of course it will be ready to grow again.

Another key point is that even if you do allow the rest period between the two cycles, you will not gain nearly as much the second time around (this is considering the exact same cycle is used both times).

This is again, due to the fact that the body has grown and requires a larger amount of anabolics to continue the growth.

Excellent and valid questions SK. I appreciate the discussion.

Many of you 'young bucks' are very intelligent as far as using anabolics. I am quite impressed.

1. Well it isn't just the extra weight that you lost post cycle that you gain in your next cycle, but point taken in that aspect.

2. There is no difference in the testosterone that your body produces and the testosterone that comes in a vial.

3. Our two arguments are really seeing one thing in two different ways, no real proof of either or. Take an apple for example, one person can call it an apple another can call it a red object with a tail. Both are right.

-sk

 

[CanadianBro]

2. There is no difference in the testosterone that your body produces and the testosterone that comes in a vial.
No there is no structural difference but there is a difference as to how the body reacts to each.

3. Our two arguments are really seeing one thing in two different ways, no real proof of either or. Take an apple for example, one person can call it an apple another can call it a red object with a tail. Both are right.
I must crown you the king of analogies after this one. "A red object with a tail". LOL

-sk

 

[sk*]

"No there is no structural difference but there is a difference as to how the body reacts to each." I'll take your word for this, but I really dont see why.

-sk

 

[JKD]

sk* - I thought what I posted was clear enough. Do a poll on what the average dose of test was for a first cycle. Then do another poll to see if they were happy with there results. My guess is that you will find the dosage ranges between 400 - 600mgs and they were satisfied with there gains.

I read countless post on 1st timers using between 400 - 500mgs of test and get great strength and size gains. My conclusion is based on the testimonials of fellow board members and testimonials of friends.

"First cycle was 200mg/week of deca and I bumped it up to 400mg for a few weeks in between. Total net gain = 0." That supprizes me - are you sure it was real? Did you train and eat right.

Also, its a public board - and as long as I am with in the guildlines of board rules - I don't see a problem with posting my 2 cents. No flame was intended.

 

[sk*]

sk* - I thought what I posted was clear enough. Do a poll on what the average dose of test was for a first cycle. Then do another poll to see if they were happy with there results. My guess is that you will find the dosage ranges between 400 - 600mgs and they were satisfied with there gains.

I read countless post on 1st timers using between 400 - 500mgs of test and get great strength and size gains. My conclusion is based on the testimonials of fellow board members and testimonials of friends.

"First cycle was 200mg/week of deca and I bumped it up to 400mg for a few weeks in between. Total net gain = 0." That supprizes me - are you sure it was real? Did you train and eat right.

Also, its a public board - and as long as I am with in the guildlines of board rules - I don't see a problem with posting my 2 cents. No flame was intended.

I would have absolutely no problem if you stated this in your first post, although I don't agree with you. My problem was that you just said a statement (which was obviously said and actually backed by) and passed by when everyone else was discussing it.

-sk

 

[JKD]

"I would have absolutely no problem if you stated this in your first post, although I don't agree with you. My problem was that you just said a statement (which was obviously said and actually backed by) and passed by when everyone else was discussing it. " Thats fair.

Really what it comes down to is the indivdual. I have seen some people grow off as little as 200mg of test. I have also seen people do 1 g of test and get poor gains. Diet, Training, Rest and gentics come into play.

I think the first time runner needs to see how there body is going to react. Thats just my opinion - I would hate for a new user to get gyno for taking to much when they could have lowered their dosage and avoided the bitch tits.

But I also hear you when you say its the first time so why not take advantage of your clean receptors. However, Cautions does need to be taken if your going to hitting a g of test a week (not that it doesn't if your taking less).

You have made some valid points in your post as well as other posters. Either way this thread gives some good info for new users to consider.

 

[sk*]

-sk

 

[macDbol]

Yes, the rest will allow you to further gains mainly for 2 reasons:

1. The body has began producing it's own testosterone again and the introduction of an exogeneous anabolic will shock the body. Very similar to changing patterns in training style.

2. You will no doubt have lost some of the gains post-cycle and the body will again be ready for another stage of growth. Remember, the body can only grow so quickly. It must adapt to it's weight, which of course takes time.

You see, the body never actually adapts to the testosterone. It simply needs time to adapt to the mass that has been added. And then of course it will be ready to grow again.

Another key point is that even if you do allow the rest period between the two cycles, you will not gain nearly as much the second time around (this is considering the exact same cycle is used both times).

This is again, due to the fact that the body has grown and requires a larger amount of anabolics to continue the growth.

Excellent and valid questions SK. I appreciate the discussion.

Many of you 'young bucks' are very intelligent as far as using anabolics. I am quite impressed.

canadian bro hits all points well.......sk isnt factoring in that a "growth" dose eventually becomes a "maintneince" dose for reasons other than receptor downregulation

 

[T2O]

Damn 1gram is too much for a first time IMO Bro see how your bod will accept the test. If all is OK and you really feel like it start bumping it up. I know for supression 500 would be the same as 1000 but the sides on 1000 have to be higher than on 1/2 that. I would wait and see if acne or gyno or other problems might arise before bumping it up to such a massive amount. Like I said before too many people are shooting the shit out of themselves over night trying to blow up.

 

[Mike P.T.]

I know too many people who gain well off of lower doseages. sk* I understand what you are saying bro. I'm sure you do everything you can to grow but your genetics for juice is not good. Even the amount of insulin you were taking was more than what most would take. You are a rare breed. My younger brother for example did a deca only cycle with 300 a week for 10 weeks and gained over 10 pounds and his strength went through the roof. I still gained well even on my 5 and 6th cycle on 400 to 500mg test a week. You said you gained nothing. Well with proper training and diet you should have gained something just alone from that. Genetics plays a big part here. Genetics, diet, training, and rest all do though.

 

[sk*]

I know too many people who gain well off of lower doseages. sk* I understand what you are saying bro. I'm sure you do everything you can to grow but your genetics for juice is not good. Even the amount of insulin you were taking was more than what most would take. You are a rare breed. My younger brother for example did a deca only cycle with 300 a week for 10 weeks and gained over 10 pounds and his strength went through the roof. I still gained well even on my 5 and 6th cycle on 400 to 500mg test a week. You said you gained nothing. Well with proper training and diet you should have gained something just alone from that. Genetics plays a big part here. Genetics, diet, training, and rest all do though.

Maybe you are right when it comes to the genetics, but I still don't see why not hit the receptors hard on the first cycle to take maximum advantage.

BTW my Fina receptors are exceptional.

-sk

 

[Mike P.T.]

Maybe you are right when it comes to the genetics, but I still don't see why not hit the receptors hard on the first cycle to take maximum advantage.

BTW my Fina receptors are exceptional.

-sk

Well that would be a good idea if someone's goals were to be a pro-bodybuilder and knowing all that comes with it and for a beginner cycle 1 gram would be good. Think about it though bro. 1 gram would definately hit a person good and give him gains whether or not he works out right or eat or trains right but why make a person rely on only drugs to get anywhere. Plus if he starts off at 1 gram where does he go from there? He will most likely stay at that doseage range or like most people who get addicted, go higher and higher. Start off light to asess tolerance to the drug. No need to go really high like genar3 said, this is a marathon and not a sprint. Even you bro there was nothing wrong with you starting off light. You did and now you know that lighter doses don't work well for you. But what about the others with superior receptors. They may have made great gains doing far less than 1 gram but since they started there they may stay there for good.

BTW - fina is good isn't it. Even though I had bad experiences with it I'm thinking of going back on. Hmmmm.......

 

[CanadianBro]

Plus if he starts off at 1 gram where does he go from there? He will most likely stay at that doseage range or like most people who get addicted, go higher and higher.

Excellent point.

 

[sk*]

Well if a gram is trully a lot then they can go down next cycle, but knowing you screwed up your first cycle is worse than knowing you did a little too much. There aren't many things that I regret but my first cycle comes close to it.

IMO a good beginer cycle would be a stacked one with a total of 1g gear or so but not necessarily testosterone. 400mg test/400mg deca(or eq)/little dbol would be ideal IMO for a first cycle. Test alone at 1000mg is simple, just a gram of juice.

-sk

 

[CanadianBro]

but I still don't see why not hit the receptors hard on the first cycle to take maximum advantage.

-sk

It seems this issue will never end so it is time to provide the hard facts to prove that the body and receptors DO NOT ADAPT to AAS and that there is absolutely no validity to the statement:

"The first cycle is the best because you have never done steroids before and the body is not used to them yet"

The statement that the first cycle has the most effect is true, in my opinion, only by coincidence. More accurately, the cycle starting at the lowest muscular bodyweight will have the most effect. This may be because the closer you are to your untrained starting point, the easier it is to gain.

Let us look at the example of a person who achieved excellent development with several years of natural training and then has gained yet more size with several steroid cycles. He then quits training for a year and shrinks back almost to his original untrained state.

If he resumes training and uses steroids, will his gains be less than in his first cycle? No. So what that it may be his fifth or tenth cycle, not the first? There is no counter inside muscle cells counting off how many cycles one has done. In examples that I know of, the gains in such a cycle have been greater than in the first cycle. (No, that does not prove upregulation, but it is strong evidence against the permanent-downregulation-after-first cycle "theory.")

The greater the gains one has already made, the harder further gains are. This is true under any conditions, regardless of whether AAS are involved or not.

Thus the "first cycle" argument proves nothing with regards to AR regulation.


Anyways, here are the facts:

- There is no scientific evidence whatsoever that AR downregulation occurs in human muscle, or in any tissue, in response to above normal (supraphysiological) levels of AAS.

- Where AR downregulation in response to AAS has been seen in cell culture, these results do not apply because the downregulation is either not relative to normal androgen levels but to zero androgen, or estrogen may have been the causative factor, or assay methods inaccurate for this purpose were used, or often a combination of these problems make the results inapplicable to the issue of supraphysiological use of androgens by athletes.

- AR upregulation in response to supraphysiological levels of androgen in cell culture has repeatedly been observed in experiments using accurate assay methods and devoid of the above problems.

- AR downregulation in response to AAS does not agree with real world results obtained by bodybuilders, whereas upregulation does agree with real world results. (A neutral position, where levels in human muscle might be thought not to change in response to high levels of androgen, is not disproven however.)

- The "theoretical" arguments advanced by proponents of AR downregulation are invariably without merit.


The belief that androgen receptors downregulate (get used to or adapt) in response to androgen is one of the most unfounded and absurd concepts in bodybuilding.

Therefore, there is no need for a novice to consume a gram of ANY anabolic steroid simply for the fact that it is his first cycle and he should take advantage of it.

Both bio-chemistry and real-world experience has dispelled this long-time myth several times over.

 

[macDbol]

It seems this issue will never end so it is time to provide the hard facts to prove that the body and receptors DO NOT ADAPT to AAS and that there is absolutely no validity to the statement:

"The first cycle is the best because you have never done steroids before and the body is not used to them yet"

The statement that the first cycle has the most effect is true, in my opinion, only by coincidence. More accurately, the cycle starting at the lowest muscular bodyweight will have the most effect. This may be because the closer you are to your untrained starting point, the easier it is to gain.

Let us look at the example of a person who achieved excellent development with several years of natural training and then has gained yet more size with several steroid cycles. He then quits training for a year and shrinks back almost to his original untrained state.

If he resumes training and uses steroids, will his gains be less than in his first cycle? No. So what that it may be his fifth or tenth cycle, not the first? There is no counter inside muscle cells counting off how many cycles one has done. In examples that I know of, the gains in such a cycle have been greater than in the first cycle. (No, that does not prove upregulation, but it is strong evidence against the permanent-downregulation-after-first cycle "theory.")

The greater the gains one has already made, the harder further gains are. This is true under any conditions, regardless of whether AAS are involved or not.

Thus the "first cycle" argument proves nothing with regards to AR regulation.


Anyways, here are the facts:

- There is no scientific evidence whatsoever that AR downregulation occurs in human muscle, or in any tissue, in response to above normal (supraphysiological) levels of AAS.

- Where AR downregulation in response to AAS has been seen in cell culture, these results do not apply because the downregulation is either not relative to normal androgen levels but to zero androgen, or estrogen may have been the causative factor, or assay methods inaccurate for this purpose were used, or often a combination of these problems make the results inapplicable to the issue of supraphysiological use of androgens by athletes.

- AR upregulation in response to supraphysiological levels of androgen in cell culture has repeatedly been observed in experiments using accurate assay methods and devoid of the above problems.

- AR downregulation in response to AAS does not agree with real world results obtained by bodybuilders, whereas upregulation does agree with real world results. (A neutral position, where levels in human muscle might be thought not to change in response to high levels of androgen, is not disproven however.)

- The "theoretical" arguments advanced by proponents of AR downregulation are invariably without merit.


The belief that androgen receptors downregulate (get used to or adapt) in response to androgen is one of the most unfounded and absurd concepts in bodybuilding.

Therefore, there is no need for a novice to consume a gram of ANY anabolic steroid simply for the fact that it is his first cycle and he should take advantage of it.

Both bio-chemistry and real-world experience has dispelled this long-time myth several times over. [/QUOT


awsome post, you should start your own thread with that post bro, get some other ppl into the convo

 

[Golden_Muscle]

I gained 23lbs and dropped a few % bodyfat with 8 amps of sust for my first.

Starting with a high dose is plain stupid.

I could grow nicely on 500mg week test, and 25mg dbol for my second, and its still not as big a cycle as some people use for their first.

 

[CanadianBro]

awsome post, you should start your own thread with that post bro, get some other ppl into the convo

Thank you my friend. I hope this post can shed some light and dispell some long time myths. Steroids are quite safe if used correctly, even for the novice user. It's usually when people jump into AAS head first, when problems occur.

Your feedback is appreciated.

 

[Texas Ranger]

BUMP!!