Adding test to NPP - risk and reward

[Mongo966]

This is my plan

I'm planning to run a cycle with

Phase 1: 350 mg of testosterone, 350 mg of nandrolone phenylpropionate (NPP), and 200 mg of masteron (mast) for 16 weeks. I will gradually increase the dosage over the first 10 weeks, maintaining a perfect diet, sleep routine, stress management, and training protocol.

It will be a nice little run. I'm sure you'll be happy with the results.
You should make a cycle log thread.
Good luck!

 

[permission to land]

Not coming off. TRT. Just to cruise before cutting.

The coming off for a month makes little sense. After a month your test will just have dropped to normal levels - you do realize Te/Tc have a 5 day half life? unless you plan on using prop ... And even if you used a short ester, one month is simply too short. The only reason for the one month "off" time is for you to delude yourself that you are not on a 24 month cycle.

 

[Jin23]

Not coming off. TRT. Just to cruise before cutting.

I didn't say you were going natty. Off as in "off cycle". Health wise you aren't doing anything by not using gear for one month.

 

[QuadFather]

I didn't say you were going natty. Off as in "off cycle". Health wise you aren't doing anything by not using gear for one month.

How is he new memeber been here 6 years?

 

[permission to land]

How is he new memeber been here 6 years?

It’s more about the body being used to the new muscle for 4/5 weeks before going into a cut. Also going to 75mg of TRT for 4 weeks after 350/350 test and npp, before going to cutting compounds can’t be a bad thing.

You think I should just go right into the cut?

Happy to take some constructive advice.

 

[QuadFather]

It’s more about the body being used to the new muscle for 4/5 weeks before going into a cut. Also going to 75mg of TRT for 4 weeks after 350/350 test and npp, before going to cutting compounds can’t be a bad thing.

You think I should just go right into the cut?

Happy to take some constructive advice.

Deca/NPP/tren are nandrolones and even though the half life isn’t much, the metabolites stick around and shuts down the Hpta and test production about a year and a half

Naturally with everything optimized and perfecting everything we’ll make 3-5mg test a day, in a calorie deficit it’s less…

70-150mg test *trt dose* a week is all that’s needed to hold onto 99% of the muscle in a calorie deficit, anything more is gaining and also water weight

 

[Jin23]

Deca/NPP/tren are nandrolones and even though the half life isn’t much, the metabolites stick around and shuts down the Hpta and test production about a year and a half

This is false.

 

[QuadFather]

This is false.

That’s it? No explanation or any advice for harm reduction.?

 

[Jin23]

That’s it? No explanation or any advice for harm reduction.?

It's been discussed (by me and by type) several times already. Use the search button.

 

[QuadFather]

It's been discussed (by me and by type) several times already. Use the search button.

just providing harm reduction for the guy. Youre setting him up for failure. Feels like you came in just to correct me instead of actually helping.

 

[Jin23]

just providing harm reduction for the guy. Youre setting him up for failure. Feels like you came in just to correct me instead of actually helping.

I've been present in this thread before you posted this. You even quoted me.

Chill, you're sounding like an offended libtard.

 

[BigTomJ]

@Jin23
yeah sure the metabolites arent going to make recovery impossible, but they seem to be certainly are providing a negative impact on HPGA function at least in some part.

We dont really have great info on exactly how long we can expect them to last and their effect would presumably dose/exposure time dependant, but dont you think its still an important talking point to bring up when people are looking at the possibility of including nandrolone in their plans if they are planning on pcting?

perhaps im misinterpreting or the absolute magnitude of its effect are just negligible but this paper seems to confirm, or at least partially support, the "Nandrolone metabolites last a long time and remain suppressive" statements.

Sci-Hub : {title} [{doi}]

So are you saying this doesnt occur? or that this occurrence is inconsequential and wont impact recovery through standard pct practices and timelines?

 

[Jin23]

@Jin23
yeah sure the metabolites arent going to make recovery impossible, but they seem to be certainly are providing a negative impact on HPGA function at least in some part.

We dont really have great info on exactly how long we can expect them to last and their effect would presumably dose/exposure time dependant, but dont you think its still an important talking point to bring up when people are looking at the possibility of including nandrolone in their plans if they are planning on pcting?

perhaps im misinterpreting or the absolute magnitude of its effect are just negligible but this paper seems to confirm, or at least partially support, the "Nandrolone metabolites last a long time and remain suppressive" statements.

Sci-Hub : {title} [{doi}]

View attachment 314764

So are you saying this doesnt occur? or that this occurrence is inconsequential and wont impact recovery through standard pct practices and timelines?

Hi @BigTomJ, haven't spoke to you in a while, hope you're doing well!

I'm aware of the long lasting metabolites (subjects to glucoronidation), however, imo they aren't present in large enough concentrations for their suppressive effects to be that relevant. Unless you have some serious polymorphisms effecting their metabolism and have used nandrolone for a prolonged period of time in order for the metabolites to have accumulated to a much larger degree.

Imo this study basically proves that steroids harm the HPG axis and not that these metabolites cause it. We don't know how long these men were on cycle and we don't know what precautionary measures they used (ie. HCG) not to mention that nandrolone is more offensive towards gonadal health then other steroids. We don't even know how they PCTed, if at all.

And as for this: "There was a significant correlation between 19-NA and LH and
FSH concentration thatlasted for 16 weeks. Atthe first visit, urinary
levels of 19-NA were significantly associated with LH and FSH levels
(r = −0.57, p = 0.02 and r = −0.75, p < 0.001, respectively). There was
still a significant correlation 9–16 weeks after the last nandrolone
intake, (r = −0.76, p < 0.001 and r = −0.72, p < 0.001, for LH and FSH
respectively (N = 15)." This "significant" correlation is withing the timeframe of the parent hormones (nandrolone) excretion window, so I'm a bit confused why they thought this correlation was relevant. Maybe I'm missing something ...

I don't think the design of this particular study was done well enough to prove anything except that nandrolone is a bad ped for tested sport athletes : )

There is a nother graph you might like, which was posted by type in his response to the same discourse we are having now, maybe he'll also explain a bit more on the topic, I'm really not interested in nandrolones ...

View attachment 259095
"Plasma testosterone concentrations were most rapidly and completely suppressed within the first week after injections of the phenylpropionate ester, but this suppression was sustained for the shortest time. The duration of suppression was significantly longest after the gluteal 1-ml injection. Plasma testosterone concentrations returned to base line by day 13 after the phenylpropionate ester but required >20 days to return to base-line levels after the decanoate ester." Minto CF, Howe C, Wishart S, Conway AJ, Handelsman DJ. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of nandrolone esters in oil vehicle: effects of ester, injection site and injection volume. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1997 Apr;281(1):93-102.
- FSH suppression occurred rapidly (day 3 or 4) but returned to base-line practically immediately after phenylpropionate (IM gluteal) and after about a week with decanoate (Table 6, Inhibin, p. 100)

But nandrolone (as hexyloxyphenylpropionate; Anadur) at 200 mg every 21 days was unable to maintain suppression of spermatogenesis whereas 100 mg testoterone (as enanthate) was able. Behre, H. M., Kliesch, S., Lemcke, B., von Eckardstein, S., & Nieschlag, E. (2001). Suppression of spermatogenesis to azoospermia by combined administration of GnRH antagonist and 19-nortestosterone cannot be maintained by this non-aromatizable androgen alone. Human Reproduction, 16(12), 2570–2577. doi:10.1093/humrep/16.12.2570. Swerdloff, R. S., Bagatell, C. J., Wang, C., Anawalt, B. D., Berman, N., Steiner, B., & Bremner, W. J. (1998). Suppression of Spermatogenesis in Man Induced by Nal-Glu Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone Antagonist and Testosterone Enanthate (TE) Is Maintained by TE Alone1. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 83(10), 3527–3533. doi:10.1210/jcem.83.10.5184

LH suppression was mostly reversed by week 6 post-cycle with 250 mg Test Cyp per week versus week 10 post-cycle in 500 mg group.

This is from a 2018 paper titled Population PK/PD Modeling of Testosterone Cypionate in Healthy Male Subjects by Bi, Perry, Ellerby, et al.

In conclusion, if you're just basically worried about which nandrolone ester is going to give you the most grief with recovery of HPG axis functioning, you're simply worried about the wrong thing if you consider testosterone to be a smooth recovery. Deca is worse than NPP in this regard, but even the Anadur (21-day half life) is unable to fully suppress HPG axis functioning at 200 mg every 21 days unlike testosterone enanthate or cypionate at 100 mg every week.

 

[permission to land]

Some great info here.

So, I can safely transition to a blast to a cut with low dose test. Great.

Learnt something!

In terms of titrating from my surplus’s to my defecit, how many weeks should this be over?

 

[BigTomJ]

Hi @BigTomJ, haven't spoke to you in a while, hope you're doing well!

I'm aware of the long lasting metabolites (subjects to glucoronidation), however, imo they aren't present in large enough concentrations for their suppressive effects to be that relevant. Unless you have some serious polymorphisms effecting their metabolism and have used nandrolone for a prolonged period of time in order for the metabolites to have accumulated to a much larger degree.

Imo this study basically proves that steroids harm the HPG axis and not that these metabolites cause it. We don't know how long these men were on cycle and we don't know what precautionary measures they used (ie. HCG) not to mention that nandrolone is more offensive towards gonadal health then other steroids. We don't even know how they PCTed, if at all.

And as for this: "There was a significant correlation between 19-NA and LH and
FSH concentration thatlasted for 16 weeks. Atthe first visit, urinary
levels of 19-NA were significantly associated with LH and FSH levels
(r = −0.57, p = 0.02 and r = −0.75, p < 0.001, respectively). There was
still a significant correlation 9–16 weeks after the last nandrolone
intake, (r = −0.76, p < 0.001 and r = −0.72, p < 0.001, for LH and FSH
respectively (N = 15)." This "significant" correlation is withing the timeframe of the parent hormones (nandrolone) excretion window, so I'm a bit confused why they thought this correlation was relevant. Maybe I'm missing something ...

I don't think the design of this particular study was done well enough to prove anything except that nandrolone is a bad ped for tested sport athletes : )

There is a nother graph you might like, which was posted by type in his response to the same discourse we are having now, maybe he'll also explain a bit more on the topic, I'm really not interested in nandrolones ...

awesome, thanks for your insight, always good discussion.

Since its unlikely we can get a real definitive answer to:
1) what the effect relative to those metabolites presented (19-NA being present, albeit in extremely low quantities, a year later) is due to those metabolites vs the original parent hormone.
2) if those metabolites are present in sufficient quantities to have any meaningful effect
3) if they do have a suppressive effect AND are present in enough quantities that their effect would complicate PCT on a standard PCT timeline when the various PCT drugs are being used.


It still seems plausible to me that 19-NA and potentially other metabolites MAY impact, complicate, work against traditional PCT scheduling.
I think I would still generally not recommend using nandrolone IF you plan on PCTing right away or at least advise on a cruise period for a bit just to give those metabolites more time to clear out, just to be on the safe side. But I think you and type are probably right that the difference is probably just minutia

 

[QuadFather]

So would you guys agree to just tell someone who doesn’t really understand to avoid this and if they do touch it plan to cruise TRT for a year or two? That’s all to save time but good info

 

[BigTomJ]

Some great info here.

So, I can safely transition to a blast to a cut with low dose test. Great.

Learnt something!

In terms of titrating from my surplus’s to my defecit, how many weeks should this be over?

how much of a surplus and how much of a deficit?

I like to have at least a few weeks at maintenance calories to help 'solidify' the new tissue. As far as im aware there isnt any science to support this and i freely admit that this is likely 100% bro science, but its something that is often repeated by the highest levels of coaching.

Lets say you are going from a 500cal surplus to a 500 cal deficit.

Whenever its time to end that surplus, Id pull down to maintenance calories over 2-3 weeks, hold at maintenance for 3-6 weeks, then cut calories by 200 and hold that deficit. When fat loss progress slows, reduce the deficit 100cals and hold that new deficit until fat loss slows again. Rinse repeat to your desired result or tolerability.

All of numbers in both calories and time frames are entirely arbitrary and individual specific, you will have to learn what works best for you in regards to; rate of progress, hunger signaling, digestive response, ect.
This all completely ignores the variable of added cardio or increasing TDEE through modifying NEAT (through increased steps or otherwise) for simplicities sake

 

[BigTomJ]

So would you guys agree to just tell someone who doesn’t really understand to avoid this and if they do touch it plan to cruise TRT for a year or two? That’s all to save time but good info

my position based on what i know currently, is it just doesn't seem worth the potential risk, there are plenty of compound options out there that are better suited for someone who wants to come completely off that for sure don't complicate things.

 

[permission to land]

how much of a surplus and how much of a deficit?

I like to have at least a few weeks at maintenance calories to help 'solidify' the new tissue. As far as im aware there isnt any science to support this and i freely admit that this is likely 100% bro science, but its something that is often repeated by the highest levels of coaching.

Lets say you are going from a 500cal surplus to a 500 cal deficit.

Whenever its time to end that surplus, Id pull down to maintenance calories over 2-3 weeks, hold at maintenance for 3-6 weeks, then cut calories by 200 and hold that deficit. When fat loss progress slows, reduce the deficit 100cals and hold that new deficit until fat loss slows again. Rinse repeat to your desired result or tolerability.

All of numbers in both calories and time frames are entirely arbitrary and individual specific, you will have to learn what works best for you in regards to; rate of progress, hunger signaling, digestive response, ect.
This all completely ignores the variable of added cardio or increasing TDEE through modifying NEAT (through increased steps or otherwise) for simplicities sake

I’m always gain nicely with 500 surpluss. Il likely drop down to a 500 defecit. I’m not into extreme dieting. I think it makes sense to do what you said. That was the way my mind was thinking.

Great advice that I will apply. Ta

 

[Jin23]

awesome, thanks for your insight, always good discussion.

Since its unlikely we can get a real definitive answer to:
1) what the effect relative to those metabolites presented (19-NA being present, albeit in extremely low quantities, a year later) is due to those metabolites vs the original parent hormone.
2) if those metabolites are present in sufficient quantities to have any meaningful effect
3) if they do have a suppressive effect AND are present in enough quantities that their effect would complicate PCT on a standard PCT timeline when the various PCT drugs are being used.


It still seems plausible to me that 19-NA and potentially other metabolites MAY impact, complicate, work against traditional PCT scheduling.
I think I would still generally not recommend using nandrolone IF you plan on PCTing right away or at least advise on a cruise period for a bit just to give those metabolites more time to clear out, just to be on the safe side. But I think you and type are probably right that the difference is probably just minutia

I mean they do bind to AR's and are androgenic so ... they sure wont help you recover. And as you saw in the study you posted, pharmacokinetics vary widely between people, so for some it may have less or more of an effect then for others. And I'm arguing that even for the slow metabolizers, the effect wont be detrimental.

However, what is falsely spread is the idea that you CAN'T pct from nandrolones for a long time after cessation of the cycle (up to a year and a half). I think this idea came from MPMD.

Deca/NPP/tren are nandrolones and even though the half life isn’t much, the metabolites stick around and shuts down the Hpta and test production about a year and a half

The idea that you CAN'T recover is just plain old false, as I already expressed my self in my abbreviated response to this very quote.

And btw, tren doesn't have such long lasting suppressing metabolites. That's only nandrolone.