AAS Choice Question

[nekojeeta]

It seems like once you get out of the newbie gains phase that your body is capped at 0.5-2 lbs of muscle growth a month assuming your training, food, and sleep are on point. If I understand things correctly, PEDs just enable you to continue with this rate of muscle growth regardless of your individual genetics, which may have limited your ability to gain muscle after a certain point. It also sounds like even if you take more PEDs than you need you are still capped at this muscle growth of rate.

So given this, why are people so obsessed with doing stronger anabolics if they can just get the same result in terms of muscle using safer compounds with less sides like masteron or primo (even if you are using higher mg’s of these two drugs it’s often going to be much better for your health than the aforementioned roids).

Sure, you can pump yourself full of Tren, Deca, etc. and gain a shit ton of water weight in addition to your 0.5-2lbs of muscle a month… and I guess that might make you look fuller…. But actual muscle gain will be the same, right?

Just looking to better understand as I plan my own cycles etc. and making sure I’m not missing the obvious… thanks

 

[rexy]

The way I see it is, based on individual genetics, people will have a different biological ceiling for how much they can gain in a given amount of time. The more blessed you are, the higher that rate will be. Then, based on that, higher doses don't drive 'more' gains.

You have to judge dosages relative to yourself, not others. Some people may achieve elite levels at 1500mg total. Others 2g total. Others may have to push beyond even that. But ultimately it depends on what it takes to reach that persons biological ceiling. Regardless, you can't cheat time.

You only have to look at some of the most elite to see that this is true - Nick Walker gaining 100lbs over 10-12 years; Breon Ansley peaking now in his 40s after 30 years of training and at least a decade on PEDs.

What different compounds do offer is other options, and different secondary effects - including visual look at lean body levels. That's IF you can tolerate them.

You can use higher doses of Test solo, or use a mix of test and primo/EQ, or you can use Tren and have it's effect on nutrient partioning and it's stronger relative potency; meaning less needed to hit your biological ceiling. The different compounds give you different options if you experience side effects with any particular one.

The difference in potency per mg just means they can be dosed lower; not that they will exceed your biological cap. You just hit it sooner. So rather than pumping 3g of Masteron, you can just use 200mg Tren (for example, not concrete numbers). It doesn't mean you can cheat your own clock though - tissue will still accrue at a maximum rate for a given individual. The compounds just influence how much it takes to get there and what you look like along the way. Potentially strength too.

At least that's the way I see it. But sustainability is king, as seen by the elite in the sport who always have decades of good training and AAS use behind them.

If it wasn't the case that we have rate-limiters, we'd all just do a year of 5g of whatever we could tolerate and end up Mr Olympia contenders.

 

[nekojeeta]

The way I see it is, based on individual genetics, people will have a different biological ceiling for how much they can gain in a given amount of time. The more blessed you are, the higher that rate will be. Then, based on that, higher doses don't drive 'more' gains.

You have to judge dosages relative to yourself, not others. Some people may achieve elite levels at 1500mg total. Others 2g total. Others may have to push beyond even that. But ultimately it depends on what it takes to reach that persons biological ceiling. Regardless, you can't cheat time.

You only have to look at some of the most elite to see that this is true - Nick Walker gaining 100lbs over 10-12 years; Breon Ansley peaking now in his 40s after 30 years of training and at least a decade on PEDs.

What different compounds do offer is other options, and different secondary effects. IF you can tolerate them.

You can use higher doses of Test solo, or use a mix of test and primo/EQ, or you can use Tren and have it's effect on nutrient partioning and it's stronger relative potency; meaning less needed to hit your biological ceiling.

The difference in potency per mg just means they can be dosed lower; not that they will exceed your biological cap. You just hit it sooner. So rather than pumping 3g of Masteron, you can just use 200mg Tren (for example, not concrete numbers).

At least that's the way I see it. But sustainability is king, as seen by the elite in the sport who always have decades of good training and AAS use behind them.

Thanks - I guess it depends on the impact to your health and sanity that 200mg of Tren has on you vs. 3mg of Masteron, as I suspect in many cases the higher Masteron dose will have less negative impacts on your health markers/sanity/less sides.

It would be interesting to see if those elite athletes muscle gains were mostly in their earlier years vs their later years and if the later years gains were at a much slower pace. I also wonder if the same gains could have been achieved using a higher masteron dose instead and been better on their health

 

[Psy-chonaut]

You need to do some more anecdotal research ....
Cuz the world is all over the place , there is no universal reply I can give you..

Some people can handle test, others not so much.....

Some gets crazy anxiety of lets say Nandrolone , and maybe some people with dopamine issues ADHD like them ??
Some get crazy unhealthy water retention of it , others not.....

And if your genetics dont respond to a gram of primo - but it does to 70 mg of tren Ace - Dont know which will fuck your lipids up more..
Masteron I dont see as a muscle builder for myself, but just as a add-on with some tools

 

[rexy]

Thanks - I guess it depends on the impact to your health and sanity that 200mg of Tren has on you vs. 3mg of Masteron, as I suspect in many cases the higher Masteron dose will have less negative impacts on your health markers/sanity/less sides.

It would be interesting to see if those elite athletes muscle gains were mostly in their earlier years vs their later years and if the later years gains were at a much slower pace. I also wonder if the same gains could have been achieved using a higher masteron dose instead and been better on their health

Yes exactly. The different compounds allow you to get to the same end destination but using a different route if one doesn't suit you - like the Tren example.

The impact on bloodwork is different, hence why sustainability is king.

Ultimately, high-level physiques take 5-10 years to truly build, depending on genetics of course. But as mentioned, even the most elite usually have a decade of AAS use behind them and just as much if not more in terms of training. I do suspect they gain the majority in the first 4-5 years, because usually they'll start out with harsher compounds and move to more sustainable ones as they realise they need to be in it for the long game.

 

[nekojeeta]

Yes exactly. The different compounds allow you to get to the same end destination but using a different route if one doesn't suit you - like the Tren example.

The impact on bloodwork is different, hence why sustainability is king.

Ultimately, high-level physiques take 5-10 years to truly build, depending on genetics of course. But as mentioned, even the most elite have decades of AAS use behind them. I do suspect they gain the majority in the first 4-5 years, because usually they'll start out with harsher compounds and move to more sustainable ones as they realise they need to be in it for the long game.

Makes sense - I’m a little late to this game and not trying to compete, so just sticking to the safer compounds myself

Hard to separate what’s broscience and just myths being passed on vs what’s real, understanding we do have individual variability. That said it does seem like a lot of the elite coaches have landed on Test + Mast with some variability during prep

 

[nekojeeta]

You need to do some more anecdotal research ....
Cuz the world is all over the place , there is no universal reply I can give you..

Some people can handle test, others not so much.....

Some gets crazy anxiety of lets say Nandrolone , and maybe some people with dopamine issues ADHD like them ??
Some get crazy unhealthy water retention of it , others not.....

And if your genetics dont respond to a gram of primo - but it does to 70 mg of tren Ace - Dont know which will fuck your lipids up more..
Masteron I dont see as a muscle builder for myself, but just as a add-on with some tools

Agreed, but not really trying to account for the 5-10% outliers

More the 90%

 

[rexy]

That said it does seem like a lot of the elite coaches have landed on Test + Mast with some variability during prep

Just keep in mind they are usually saying what they do now, not what they did to build their physique.

There are endless examples of this. John Jewett is a good one, because he said on a podcast the majority of his gains were built with Jansen pushing Test. He still runs it at 1.2-1.4g now in the offseason. He posted that himself on his forum. He also likes Deca, but doesn't run it that often now it seems. I bet he has done though in the past. At present, what his accompanying 700 Masteron and 700 Primo is achieving is likely just E2 modulation.

So keep in mind what they say now is usually aimed at a different goal - being more sustainable.

 

[nekojeeta]

Just keep in mind they are usually saying what they do now, not what they did to build their physique.

There are endless examples of this. John Jewett is a good one, because he said on a podcast the majority of his gains were built with Jansen pushing Test. He still runs it at 1.2-1.4g now in the offseason.

So keep in mind what they say now is usually aimed at a different goal - being more sustainable.

Agreed, but I think in your earlier years of lifting you can go well beyond the 0.5-2lbs so maybe there is some merit to using more anabolic per mg of compounds. Although, who knows if they could have achieved the same using safer compounds at higher doses (we’ll never know)

Some good questions to ask the next time Jewett, Joe Jeffries, etc do a Q&A session

 

[rexy]

Agreed, but I think in your earlier years of lifting you can go well beyond the 0.5-2lbs so maybe there is some merit to using more anabolic per mg of compounds. Although, who knows if they could have achieved the same using safer compounds at higher doses (we’ll never know)

Some good questions to ask the next time Jewett, Joe Jeffries, etc do a Q&A session

I don't doubt it myself that the earlier years will be more productive, or at least have the potential to be. It usually takes a few years to lock in your training though, so that's why some people may find year 2-3 and beyond more productive; they finally learned what works for them with training and can lock it in.

You're right in that for the most part we'll never know in comparison, but i know where my money sits - on Test/Nand/Tren being leveraged until no longer possible and health has to become priority. Masteron and Primo as main anabolics seem to only really have become so popular in the last 5-10 years and usually at the backend of someone's career.

 

[RockyP]

The most important thing is finding what compounds you can tolerate in terms of your health markers and other side effects. I know of a lot of veteran BBers who don't use tren. Some don't use orals at all (I havent touched orals in 20 years and won't ever again). You are correct in your OP about Test + anabolic you can tolerate, and just repeating that over time (along with GH). Genetics runs the gamut of how people respond to gear in terms of anabolism but also side effects. I almost shit myself when I saw my buddy's bloodwork years ago - he was 230 lbs competing at nationals running around 2 grams of gear into the show, including tren and 2 - 3 orals at the same time. His bloodwork was totally normal other than for some very slight LFT elevation, nothing more than you'd expect if you drew blood after a night of drinking. His HgB / HCT were normal. Lipids were normal. I was befuddled. Now his BP might be another story, not sure. The point is, if you are looking to gain size over the long haul, best to go slow. Unless you are an absolute genetic freak (you'd know by now if you were), there's no need to rush. Keep the dosages as low as you can for as long as you can. Keep the compounds you use simple. I'm not sure if you've listened to Big Paul over at AB but your thoughts about Test and something like Primo / Mast / EQ are similar to his (he likes test / primo / GH). Just rinse and repeat over and over. Most importantly, that diet needs to be on point (and training also). The increased dosages will only help if there is more fuel and more training stimulus.

One last thing - a lot of compounds are misunderstood and have bad reputations. A lot of the effects can be dose dependent highly individual. Remember back in Arnold's day that mostly just had Dbol, Primo, and Deca. They didn't look watery or bloated. I've run Deca at 200 mg on cuts before (mostly for joints but mild anticatabolic) with zero side effects / unwanted bloat. If your diet / hydration is poor then you will blow up with water on most compounds. Personally, I took a 20 year hiatus from gear after blasting through most of my 20's. Started back on HRT and then took the dosages up a smidge, 200 - 300 mg test, 3 to 4 iu GH, and once a year or so I'll bump them up a bit more and add primo / mast, sometimes very low dose deca for my old joints. But that's really it, and I feel great, bloods are good, no side effects. Very sustainable. TBH, you really only need test and GH, especially if not competing. You can adjust dosages to your desired effect and the rest of the equation is diet / training (it's the majority really, the compounds are secondary).

 

[Jky3rd]

TBH, you really only need test and GH, especially if not competing. You can adjust dosages to your desired effect and the rest of the equation is diet / training (it's the majority really, the compounds are secondary).

100 percent this

 

[Slowww]

Do you really think gaining 2lbs per month is the norm? “Can continue with regardless of genetics with PEDS” is this what science says? Which body builders are gaining 25lbs per year of only muscle? How can this be everybody if even most elite body builders do not have the ability to do this?

The premise of your question is totally flawed because the foundational belief does not reflect reality.

Also YES more gear = more gains within reason…. That’s why you see guys get big really fucking fast but also demolish their health or end up dying faster.

Stronger anabolics put on more mass, more anabolics put on more mass. More gh gives more results than less gh and so on. Sure at some point there are diminishing returns that are outweighed by health consequences, so there is a balance to strike based on personal values/goals etc

 

[nekojeeta]

Do you really think gaining 2lbs per month is the norm? “Can continue with regardless of genetics with PEDS” is this what science says? Which body builders are gaining 25lbs per year of only muscle? How can this be everybody if even most elite body builders do not have the ability to do this?

The premise of your question is totally flawed because the foundational belief does not reflect reality.

Also YES more gear = more gains within reason…. That’s why you see guys get big really fucking fast but also demolish their health or end up dying faster.

Stronger anabolics put on more mass, more anabolics put on more mass. More gh gives more results than less gh and so on. Sure at some point there are diminishing returns that are outweighed by health consequences, so there is a balance to strike based on personal values/goals etc

I think your reading comprehension is more flawed than my premise… I did say 0.5 - 2 lbs a month… so that’s a 6-24 lb range and of course the elite of the elite will be on the lower end especially as they get more years of training under their belt…

I guess my main question is that if you account for the anabolic potency across compounds, would you get the same or similar muscle gain results with less downsides if you took an anabolic equivalent amount of a safer drug vs a riskier drug. For example taking 500mg of MastE vs 100mg of TrenA (TrenA is supposedly 3-5x more anabolic on a mg by mg basis).

 

[nekojeeta]

The most important thing is finding what compounds you can tolerate in terms of your health markers and other side effects. I know of a lot of veteran BBers who don't use tren. Some don't use orals at all (I havent touched orals in 20 years and won't ever again). You are correct in your OP about Test + anabolic you can tolerate, and just repeating that over time (along with GH). Genetics runs the gamut of how people respond to gear in terms of anabolism but also side effects. I almost shit myself when I saw my buddy's bloodwork years ago - he was 230 lbs competing at nationals running around 2 grams of gear into the show, including tren and 2 - 3 orals at the same time. His bloodwork was totally normal other than for some very slight LFT elevation, nothing more than you'd expect if you drew blood after a night of drinking. His HgB / HCT were normal. Lipids were normal. I was befuddled. Now his BP might be another story, not sure. The point is, if you are looking to gain size over the long haul, best to go slow. Unless you are an absolute genetic freak (you'd know by now if you were), there's no need to rush. Keep the dosages as low as you can for as long as you can. Keep the compounds you use simple. I'm not sure if you've listened to Big Paul over at AB but your thoughts about Test and something like Primo / Mast / EQ are similar to his (he likes test / primo / GH). Just rinse and repeat over and over. Most importantly, that diet needs to be on point (and training also). The increased dosages will only help if there is more fuel and more training stimulus.

One last thing - a lot of compounds are misunderstood and have bad reputations. A lot of the effects can be dose dependent highly individual. Remember back in Arnold's day that mostly just had Dbol, Primo, and Deca. They didn't look watery or bloated. I've run Deca at 200 mg on cuts before (mostly for joints but mild anticatabolic) with zero side effects / unwanted bloat. If your diet / hydration is poor then you will blow up with water on most compounds. Personally, I took a 20 year hiatus from gear after blasting through most of my 20's. Started back on HRT and then took the dosages up a smidge, 200 - 300 mg test, 3 to 4 iu GH, and once a year or so I'll bump them up a bit more and add primo / mast, sometimes very low dose deca for my old joints. But that's really it, and I feel great, bloods are good, no side effects. Very sustainable. TBH, you really only need test and GH, especially if not competing. You can adjust dosages to your desired effect and the rest of the equation is diet / training (it's the majority really, the compounds are secondary).

Thanks - what you say all makes sense and I do listen to Big Paul and a few others.

Training, food, hydration and sleep are all important. To me it just seems like 90% of people would likely fair better from using a safer compound like MastE at higher doses at match whatever anabolic load they are looking to get through some like Tren, Deca, etc. sure they are those 5-10% that can take Tren and Deca like a champ at whatever dose, but that’s a very small %

 

[RockyP]

Thanks - what you say all makes sense and I do listen to Big Paul and a few others.

Training, food, hydration and sleep are all important. To me it just seems like 90% of people would likely fair better from using a safer compound like MastE at higher doses at match whatever anabolic load they are looking to get through some like Tren, Deca, etc. sure they are those 5-10% that can take Tren and Deca like a champ at whatever dose, but that’s a very small %

It's all very, very individual. I tolerate nandrolone very well and it agrees with me, but I run low doses, 200 per week max. I used tren in my 20's, it was fun, but won't mess with it again. I personally don't use orals and I think they have a horrible risk / reward for anyone other than a competitor in the final 3 weeks pre-contest. I do agree with you (and Paul) regarding simplicity and sustainability. Some people will lose their hair on Mast / Primo. Some will have their estrogen absolutely crash (can adjust dosage to modulate this). Some will have lipid problems when they thought they wouldn't. Only way to know is to try, but I do think you can build a world class (for your genetics) physique with just test and an anabolic (GH is a bonus).