Anadrol for women? I'd never have thunk it
I don't remember reading about this. Maybe you did give away a secret
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Anavar/Primobolan cycle for a female
- Thread starter jdemon519
- Start date
Anadrol for women? I'd never have thunk it
I don't remember reading about this. Maybe you did give away a secret
I just re-read your Anadrol profile and you did mention it there!
It is in the newer version of the profile, posted 2011, but indeed was not in the older profile!
It seems like there's tremendous resistance or just intuitive rejection to the idea of Anadrol for women, but in this case actuality doesn't match intuition at all.
Maybe the profile will get the word out.
Another thing about Anadrol that's remarkable is that other anabolic steroids are very easily disruptive of the menstrual cycle. Even dosages such as 2.5 mg oxandrolone 2x/day commonly raise issues. Anadrol however medically has shown often only moderate effect on the menstrual cycle at 50 mg/day, and in my too-limited experience with it (as I generally don't work with women on steroid cycles) 25 mg/day only lightened and shortened the cycles slightly. Remarkably less disruptive.
It seems like there's tremendous resistance or just intuitive rejection to the idea of Anadrol for women, but in this case actuality doesn't match intuition at all.
Maybe the profile will get the word out.
Another thing about Anadrol that's remarkable is that other anabolic steroids are very easily disruptive of the menstrual cycle. Even dosages such as 2.5 mg oxandrolone 2x/day commonly raise issues. Anadrol however medically has shown often only moderate effect on the menstrual cycle at 50 mg/day, and in my too-limited experience with it (as I generally don't work with women on steroid cycles) 25 mg/day only lightened and shortened the cycles slightly. Remarkably less disruptive.
Last edited:
Hi blondgirll, I accidentally missed seeing your post as the thread had added another page, which I had went to.
Best of results!!
Looking forward to a great outcome for you.
I was saying that they are about equivalent for results, or if anything the Anadrol may be better. Yet the Anadrol is I believe safer.
I wouldn't stack them. That could well be too much.
If it did happen that you decided that 25 mg/day Anadrol (as 12.5 mg, which would usually be one-quarter tab, twice per day) was not quite enough, I'd go to 12.5 mg 3x/day as a following step. But the results are typically excellent with just the 25 mg/day, so you probably will not feel a need to increase it. If you did though, that's how I'd do it.
Last edited:
Should women cycle as we males should? What are your thoughts?
mands
mands
The situation is very different and unfortunately there just isn't as clear basis for conclusions.
Here's what I think is fair to say:
Unlike with men, where there can be benefit in hammering hard (so to speak) for a shorter time to obtain given results, thus allowing shorter cycles giving faster recovery (whether referring to 2 weeks vs say 8, or say 8 vs 14), for women wanting to minimize adverse side effects, using a lower dose even if this requires more time can give more results for the given risk, or less risk for the same results.
With men, HPTA disruption isn't a big deal when properly handled. In a different life, it would have been interesting to see what could be done with timed use of progesterone, possibly SERMS, and possibly estradiol valerate to quickly re-establish normal HPTA cycling for women after anabolic steroid use, but in practice I have never even begun it. Such work never having been done, the unfortunate fact is that disruption tends to last months. So, doing for example three cycles per year can mean being disrupted all the time.
I can't say what to do to safely compete at levels requiring muscle far beyond what could ever be attained with only very mild usage. I can't say how to cycle for best minimization (though there will still be a lot of adverse effect) if choosing to use such doses. This may be from there being no real answer.
For results that are still really impressive but much milder, it doesn't seem critical exactly how the cycling is done. The main factors to look at simply seem to be choice of steroid, dosage, and with total usage per year also almost undoubtedly being relevant. So for example, if comparing between being "more conservative" and using say 40 mg/week Primobolan but using it 52 weeks per year, versus 50 mg/week Primobolan but using it only 12 weeks per year, the second use is much less conservative! However I just don't have the basis to say what would count as being an equal comparison. It certainly isn't just the total mg per year, as being above or under an individual threshold is also critically important. Even a few weeks per year over the threshold is worse than very many weeks that are well under, even though the very many weeks might total considerably more steroid.
Here's what I think is fair to say:
Unlike with men, where there can be benefit in hammering hard (so to speak) for a shorter time to obtain given results, thus allowing shorter cycles giving faster recovery (whether referring to 2 weeks vs say 8, or say 8 vs 14), for women wanting to minimize adverse side effects, using a lower dose even if this requires more time can give more results for the given risk, or less risk for the same results.
With men, HPTA disruption isn't a big deal when properly handled. In a different life, it would have been interesting to see what could be done with timed use of progesterone, possibly SERMS, and possibly estradiol valerate to quickly re-establish normal HPTA cycling for women after anabolic steroid use, but in practice I have never even begun it. Such work never having been done, the unfortunate fact is that disruption tends to last months. So, doing for example three cycles per year can mean being disrupted all the time.
I can't say what to do to safely compete at levels requiring muscle far beyond what could ever be attained with only very mild usage. I can't say how to cycle for best minimization (though there will still be a lot of adverse effect) if choosing to use such doses. This may be from there being no real answer.
For results that are still really impressive but much milder, it doesn't seem critical exactly how the cycling is done. The main factors to look at simply seem to be choice of steroid, dosage, and with total usage per year also almost undoubtedly being relevant. So for example, if comparing between being "more conservative" and using say 40 mg/week Primobolan but using it 52 weeks per year, versus 50 mg/week Primobolan but using it only 12 weeks per year, the second use is much less conservative! However I just don't have the basis to say what would count as being an equal comparison. It certainly isn't just the total mg per year, as being above or under an individual threshold is also critically important. Even a few weeks per year over the threshold is worse than very many weeks that are well under, even though the very many weeks might total considerably more steroid.
That is a fair enough answer and informative.
I would think recovery time for women would be much quicker than for men. It seems that women that I have been around that come off cycles do not have the negative rebound such as males do, when males do not run a good PCT protocol.
mands
There isn't the negative rebound in terms of muscle loss from going too low in testosterone production. Agreed.
I don't remotely claim to understand women's feelings about how their menstrual cycles and disruptions or changes in them affect them. But often it's experienced as a pretty important issue. It was recovery in this regard that I was meaning.
I don't remotely claim to understand women's feelings about how their menstrual cycles and disruptions or changes in them affect them. But often it's experienced as a pretty important issue. It was recovery in this regard that I was meaning.
Last edited:
As was I Bill! I just think I stated it wrong. I was thinking but did not write down my thoughts. I was directly meaning recovering from negative sides that could be associated with women(voice change, menstrual cycle etc. versus male problems(LH, E rebound, HPTA, etc.
Yes agreed on muscle loss.
mands
Had another thought? What about EQ for women? What are you thoughts?
mands
mands
It seems to fall along with most other anabolic steroids for benefit/risk. About 40-50 mg/week, preferably divided to two doses per week, is very effective but reasonably conservative I think for safety. (Not extremely conservative however. I'm sure for some there is risk with this dosage.)
Again, not talking about effectiveness in the pro bb'ing sense.
It's certainly a superior choice to testosterone.
Where it has a problem is that it clears so slowly. It's desirable, if adverse effects such as voice hoarseness start to appear, to be able to get levels back down rapidly. This is impossible with EQ. But this can be of no major importance given previous experience, if generally-higher doses of other anabolic steroids had previously proven acceptable.
EDIT: I want to add that while the 40-50 mg/week mentioned above was fine in a few individual cases, that shouldn't be extended to mean that at higher doses EQ is as safe as some other choices at comparable mg/week, or even necessarily that over a larger number of users, risk/benefit would be average. Basically because of the half-life reason, I don't wind up going with EQ unless the situation is that the only things available are EQ and test. Certainly I wouldn't pick it above Primobolan for example.
Last edited:
blondgirll
New Member
What about d-bol? Is it as good and and safe as Anadrol for women? I regard to luver health, I read that Anadrol is extremely harmful, more then any other woman could take. What u guys say about it?
blondgirll
New Member
*liver ...and when I say safe im saying abt masculinization sides effects...
With regard to the liver, and when used alone, this just isn't true. There is no oral anabolic steroid other than Primobolan which is medically shown to have as little liver problems as Anadrol.
However, that said, with any alkylated oral -- Primobolan oral is not, incidentally, but all too often products sold are actually Dianabol -- it's wise to use orals for only limited periods of time such as 6 weeks or if stretching it a bit, 8.
As for Dianabol, by no means can it be used at similar milligram amounts for women.
There are at least two things going on here. First, Dianabol is very potent, meaning that it takes fewer milligrams of it for given effect than is the case for most anabolic steroids; or alternately, for a given number of milligrams, there is more effect.
So let's use an example my "1/10th rule" posted above.
Is 50 mg/day Dianabol as a standalone cycle, considered mild Dianabol use for men? Not really! It's true that we consider it best to stack with other steroids, but if planning a mild Dianabol-only stack, it would probably be less than this.
But let's say we even grant that we'd call 50 mg/day Dianabol mild for a man!
Well, divide by 10 and we get 5 mg/day for women.
Which happens to be what the pharmaceutical dose was, back when Dianabol was prescribed to women.
However, actually even this amount can be virilizing.
Then on top of having higher potency (fewer mg required) it seems that Dianabol has a higher ratio of virilizing effects to muscle building effects than is the case with Anadrol.
Probably if we wanted to compare comparable safety, we'd have to drop to somewhere between 1 and 2.5 mg/day Dianabol, in divided doses, to match Anadrol 25 mg/day in divided doses.
If determined to do Dianabol, and not being out for the results women can get with say 100+ mg/week of anabolic steroids, 5 mg total per day is actually a pretty powerful dose for women when the drug is Dianabol. 10 mg/day often proves harsh. Not for the liver, but in terms of virilizing effect.
However, that said, with any alkylated oral -- Primobolan oral is not, incidentally, but all too often products sold are actually Dianabol -- it's wise to use orals for only limited periods of time such as 6 weeks or if stretching it a bit, 8.
As for Dianabol, by no means can it be used at similar milligram amounts for women.
There are at least two things going on here. First, Dianabol is very potent, meaning that it takes fewer milligrams of it for given effect than is the case for most anabolic steroids; or alternately, for a given number of milligrams, there is more effect.
So let's use an example my "1/10th rule" posted above.
Is 50 mg/day Dianabol as a standalone cycle, considered mild Dianabol use for men? Not really! It's true that we consider it best to stack with other steroids, but if planning a mild Dianabol-only stack, it would probably be less than this.
But let's say we even grant that we'd call 50 mg/day Dianabol mild for a man!
Well, divide by 10 and we get 5 mg/day for women.
Which happens to be what the pharmaceutical dose was, back when Dianabol was prescribed to women.
However, actually even this amount can be virilizing.
Then on top of having higher potency (fewer mg required) it seems that Dianabol has a higher ratio of virilizing effects to muscle building effects than is the case with Anadrol.
Probably if we wanted to compare comparable safety, we'd have to drop to somewhere between 1 and 2.5 mg/day Dianabol, in divided doses, to match Anadrol 25 mg/day in divided doses.
If determined to do Dianabol, and not being out for the results women can get with say 100+ mg/week of anabolic steroids, 5 mg total per day is actually a pretty powerful dose for women when the drug is Dianabol. 10 mg/day often proves harsh. Not for the liver, but in terms of virilizing effect.
Last edited:
Any women using roids not being followed by a physician is a FOOL. The virilzing can be permanent which would be of no consequence unless you want to become a transsexual.
Otherwise find a competent sports medicine DOC.
Otherwise find a competent sports medicine DOC.
That's a pretty strong statement that I will have to disagree with.
Stick with low dose mild orals and at the first sign of "issues" you stop..
An MD(like myself) isn't going to be able to do anything because first of all 99.9% of MD's know absolutely nothing about anabolic steroids, and especially with female use. What are they going to do ...monitor anavar blood levels?
I'd like to say that no matter how careful a female is she is going to get some upper lip hair growth and usually some clitoral growth even with as little as 10mg of anavar a day. Be ready for laser hair removal treatments.
I've trained and advised many females and very carefully...I know.
If you want to be a female "bodybuilder" it's much worse. Ever talk to a serious female bodybuilder? ALL have dropped voices , many are still female ,and some most certainly are not...the larynx never shrinks back lol.
RG
I don't think this can be stressed enough on getting labs with a doc. That's what I'm assuming you are saying. I don't know about a sports medicine doctor though. Maybe a HRT doc. lol
mands
An HRT doc? No speciality I'm aware of, but it's more than just labs.
It's the APPROPRIATE interpretation of the various labs required based on physical findings, history and desired outcome. Simultaneously the indicated drugs such as; supplements, hormones and metabolic modifiers are instituted and a diet-exercise plan is developed for the desired physical effects. Managing clients, especially females, in this manner limits the complications while enhancing the benefits and that is what any GOOD sports medicine physician does.
It's the APPROPRIATE interpretation of the various labs required based on physical findings, history and desired outcome. Simultaneously the indicated drugs such as; supplements, hormones and metabolic modifiers are instituted and a diet-exercise plan is developed for the desired physical effects. Managing clients, especially females, in this manner limits the complications while enhancing the benefits and that is what any GOOD sports medicine physician does.
Hence the lol Doc! I would have to agree with RG except my number is a little more conservative. I would say 95% of MD's know absolutely nothing about AAS. I would also have to say any "GOOD sports medicine physician" does not obtain anywhere near the amount of knowledge they should.
mands
I agree except on wording!
While 10 mg may sound like a low amount of oxandrolone, matching up with "even with as little as," that is actually a quite major dose for a woman.
As you say, such side effects are likely at this dosage level.
There's a reason the medical dose for women (pre-AIDS-wasting-syndrome) was 2.5 mg.
And not to beat the drum with the illustration, as after all it is only a personal observation that I don't claim to be a dead match for every anabolic steroid, but on the 1/10th rule, what would we compare 10 mg/day to?
To 100 mg/day for a man. On the heavy end rather than the mild end.
So as it happens, oxandrolone conforms to this rule of thumb also.
Where a woman doesn't want laser treatment to come in or much chance of voice change, for oxandrolone 5 mg/day in divided doses is a better top-end, and still can be markedly effective.
Similar threads
