mg per mg potency bullshit or not?

[anabolicperro]

i am opening a debate for people with enough experience using PEDS
according YOUR EXPERIENCE (let the literature/science behind) the theory of the total concentration (mgs) is what is going to determinate the potency of the cycle.
However, in my opinion 300 mg of primo is no near close to 300 mg of tren

i hear you boys

 

[TheFlange]

Well, my last blast was 400 test, 400 mast. So 800mgs.

My current blast is 300 test, 300 mast, 300 NPP. So 900mgs.

I can tell you now, it feels like a LOT more than 100mgs difference, hehe.

 

[Mishka]

Well, my last blast was 400 test, 400 mast. So 800mgs.

My current blast is 300 test, 300 mast, 300 NPP. So 900mgs.

I can tell you now, it feels like a LOT more than 100mgs difference, hehe.

You are also using 3 compounds.

Tbh I never feel much - can't tell any difference between 500 mg and 2000 mg of Test

 

[phenominal34]

You are also using 3 compounds.

Tbh I never feel much - can't tell any difference between 500 mg and 2000 mg of Test

That’s the point of the thread ….

Doesn’t matter compounds used but mg per mg

So say he said 200 test 300 mast 300 no
… still only 800 mgs as other cycle but feels like much more he’s saying

 

[holy02]

Well there is something clear and is that tren is much more anabolic than test mg per mg but with everything the more powerful it is the more sides you will get.

 

[Fattyone]

What exactly is potency? Feelz? Sides? Lab work?

 

[Xplicit]

Its not the theory of the total dose on a mg for mg basis, in fact not sure how this became a *theory*. More is better until its not, that point will be different for us all. Dont compare steroids on a mg per mg basis. You scale the dose for the compound as needed and you select the compound based on your goals and individual response.

1g of Masteron is not the same as 1g of Testostetone.

Thus if I didnt like testosterone but I wanted similar growth potential to 1g of testosterone, I would run something like 1500mg eq and 500mg mast.

Its *double the dose* but not really, especislly when you consider the ester attached to EQ but maybeee it would net similar growth potential as 1g of test. These numbers are made up examples, it will be different for everyone.

Scale the dose based on the compound and your personal response to it, along with your intended goal. Total AAS dosage means dick.

 

[effswithtren]

The idea that more does more isn’t rocket science, but the idea that a mg is a mg, regardless of what the drugs being compared are, is moronic.

 

[Type-IIx]

i am opening a debate for people with enough experience using PEDS
according YOUR EXPERIENCE (let the literature/science behind) the theory of the total concentration (mgs) is what is going to determinate the potency of the cycle.
However, in my opinion 300 mg of primo is no near close to 300 mg of tren

i hear you boys

It's referred to as equimolar potency, and it's basically how we discuss relative potency between anabolic agents. It's the least "bullshit" concept that exists – it basically "boils down" a chemical to its basic anabolism when we are discussing androgens and their respective potential to cause hypertrophy.

Obviously, at least it is for me, having done more than my due diligence of theoretical & practical work, Primo (metenolone) is less potent on an equimolar (per-mg) basis than trenbolone. This is because while metenolone is a straightforward AR agonist, subject to a sigmoidial S-shaped curve with respect to dose/response (mg vis-a-vis muscle growth), Trenbolone serves multiple bodybuilding objectives via multiple mechanisms.

Practically, this results in less pinning if using the enanthate ("Tren E") or hexahydrobenzylcarbonate ("Parabolan"), at minimum. However, trenbolone also offers other benefits vs. the universe of androgens. It's basically the "Swiss army knife" of androgens, serving a role in Bulking (increasing muscle size dramatically by augmented mIGF-I [autocrine/paracrine MGF] activity), Cutting (reducing fat mass & increasing insulin sensitivity), or recomp (simultaneously increasing LBM and decreasing FFM), via mechanisms not shared by other androgens, thereby combining synergistically (greater than additively; 1 + 1 > 2; per-mg).

See:
Worked example for synergistic combination strategies (TMT; testosterone + masteron + trenbolone)

My forthcoming book, titled Ampoule: Rational AAS Use and Principles of Cycle Design

 

[Fattyone]

See:
Worked example for synergistic combination strategies (TMT; testosterone + masteron + trenbolone)

Linky no worky

 

[Type-IIx]

Linky no worky

Worked example for synergistic combination strategies (TMT; testosterone + masteron + trenbolone)

Sorry, correction: [link]

 

[TRT]

You are also using 3 compounds.

Tbh I never feel much - can't tell any difference between 500 mg and 2000 mg of Test

It’s funny you should say that cause I’ve never got side effects from anything except maybe when I did 115mg of Tren Ace, 100mg of Test P, and 15-20iu of GH a day. It was definitely the Tren but again never felt much of anything except good.

 

[anabolicperro]

It's referred to as equimolar potency, and it's basically how we discuss relative potency between anabolic agents. It's the least "bullshit" concept that exists – it basically "boils down" a chemical to its basic anabolism when we are discussing androgens and their respective potential to cause hypertrophy.

Obviously, at least it is for me, having done more than my due diligence of theoretical & practical work, Primo (metenolone) is less potent on an equimolar (per-mg) basis than trenbolone. This is because while metenolone is a straightforward AR agonist, subject to a sigmoidial S-shaped curve with respect to dose/response (mg vis-a-vis muscle growth), Trenbolone serves multiple bodybuilding objectives via multiple mechanisms.

Practically, this results in less pinning if using the enanthate ("Tren E") or hexahydrobenzylcarbonate ("Parabolan"), at minimum. However, trenbolone also offers other benefits vs. the universe of androgens. It's basically the "Swiss army knife" of androgens, serving a role in Bulking (increasing muscle size dramatically by augmented mIGF-I [autocrine/paracrine MGF] activity), Cutting (reducing fat mass & increasing insulin sensitivity), or recomp (simultaneously increasing LBM and decreasing FFM), via mechanisms not shared by other androgens, thereby combining synergistically (greater than additively; 1 + 1 > 2; per-mg).

See:
Worked example for synergistic combination strategies (TMT; testosterone + masteron + trenbolone)

My forthcoming book, titled Ampoule: Rational AAS Use and Principles of Cycle Design

thank you for such a detailed answer.
i do have other question, you seem like you have the knowledge on this topic.
does trenbolone have a huge synergy with HGH (more than other peds)?

 

[Type-IIx]

thank you for such a detailed answer.
i do have other question, you seem like you have the knowledge on this topic.
does trenbolone have a huge synergy with HGH (more than other peds)?

Yes, because it dramatically increases auto-/para- crine IGF-IEa activity in muscle cells. In the case of trenbolone & rhGH combination, serum IGF-I levels become dissociated from GH response since trenbolone decreases (endogenous) GH pulse amplitude and pulse duration and may theoretically cause a "pull" on circulating liver-secreted IGF-I to satisfy muscle demands for IGF-IEa.