Dr Todd Lee - what do you think?

[dick_starbuck]

it will make you drop water. you will look and weigh less. that doesn't mean you are smaller, just in the same way Dbol puffing someone up with a load of water doesn't mean they gained actual muscle.

every single bit of receptor, animal, or human clinical evidence shows its anabolic.

Really human trials showing its anabolic? You mind posting this?

 

[readalot]

Really human trials showing its anabolic? You mind posting this?

I actually tried the whole mast thing due to Todd. He reminds me of the joke:

what do they call the medical student who finishes last in his class?....Dr.

J/k Dr Todd. Your UG GH bent is pretty silly though.

 

[dick_starbuck]

I actually tried the whole mast thing due to Todd. He reminds me of the joke:

what do they call the medical student who finishes last in his class?....Dr.

J/k Dr Todd. Your UG GH bent is pretty silly though.

I tried it to.

350-525mg-700mg of test and 700mg of masteron. On 350mg test, hardly any results at all. Once increased to 525 then 700mg test my results came quickly. Masteron just isnt the driver of growth people say it is.

 

[readalot]

I tried it to.

350-525mg-700mg of test and 700mg of masteron. On 350mg test, hardly any results at all. Once increased to 525 then 700mg test my results came quickly. Masteron just isnt the driver of growth people say it is.

Wow I wish I could take it that far. 420 mg/week of Test Cyp with 420 Mast E and the prostate tapped. Next stop seeing what drug I can leverage for prostate. Not being able to pee is not much fun.

Well done on the methodically approach!

 

[pipo]

If all debate it's needed if Masteron is anabolic or not than you know what the answer is.
Do we have this debate with tren or deca? Or even the mighty old test?

 

[godsgifttoearth]

Really human trials showing its anabolic? You mind posting this?

bennett et al 1972 - hormone therapy of breast cancer with special reference to masteril therapy



receptor expression via Houtmana et al vs DHT, then expressed as X time that of test



the whole point and reason in developing these drugs was for AR expression in the tissues you want, with reduced androgenicity. if they weren't more anabolic than testosterone, they have no reason to exist.

 

[Mick]

My interest is more with estro control. Can you use it as a secondary with test being the driver of growth. And can you do this without an AI. What’s that ratio look like. I know it’s independent to each person, but……running test at like a low dose and a ton of mast I feel like would really mess with my mental health lmao. Maybe I’m just stuck in the days where test has to be highest lol

 

[Grey Spartan]

The problem I have with Dr Todd Lee is he flip flops all the time and talks in "absolutes". Example, he says deca will rot your brain, yet if you look at his old videos (only two years ago) he talks about putting on mass with big ass doses of deca. So either his brain has rotted out or he is regurgitating some animal study or another "fitness" influencer.

 

[readalot]

The problem I have with Dr Todd Lee is he flip flops all the time and talks in "absolutes". Example, he says deca will rot your brain, yet if you look at his old videos (only two years ago) he talks about putting on mass with big ass doses of deca. So either his brain has rotted out or he is regurgitating some animal study or another "fitness" influencer.

Would be hilarious for someone to throw this graphic up for 30 min on YT or read it over and over on a podcast.

R

Post in thread 'Is William Llewellyn book with it?'

Jan 18, 2024

True, though while I regard Duchaine's USH II as required reading for everyone, it contains a ton of outdated info with respect to available compounds. A lot of it is opinion, also.

Holding up pretty well over 30 years later (1989)...

• readalot

• 
• 
• 

case closed.

 

[dick_starbuck]

Wow I wish I could take it that far. 420 mg/week of Test Cyp with 420 Mast E and the prostate tapped. Next stop seeing what drug I can leverage for prostate. Not being able to pee is not much fun.

Well done on the methodically approach!

5mg cialis seems to be perfect for keeping the BPH at bay.


For what it's worth it do get prostate issues on test/mast and test/primo... but NONE on test/eq. Same dosages! 700/700.

 

[readalot]

5mg cialis seems to be perfect for keeping the BPH at bay.


For what it's worth it do get prostate issues on test/mast and test/primo... but NONE on test/eq. Same dosages! 700/700.

Going for a consultation. Will check it out and thanks for sharing your experience. Very much appreciated. Thank you!

 

[dick_starbuck]

bennett et al 1972 - hormone therapy of breast cancer with special reference to masteril therapy
View attachment 334153

View attachment 334154
receptor expression via Houtmana et al vs DHT, then expressed as X time that of test

View attachment 334156

the whole point and reason in developing these drugs was for AR expression in the tissues you want, with reduced androgenicity. if they weren't more anabolic than testosterone, they have no reason to exist.

Im not smart enough to make sense of this.

 

[godsgifttoearth]

Im not smart enough to make sense of this.

then basic common sense should apply. every one of the compounds released to market for human use are equal to, or more anabolic than testosterone because if they were not they would lack the androgenic:anabolic separation to justify not just throwing testosterone at the problems.

if we are operating in the realms of 5-10g of full body protein accretion per day, then your average person has zero way of telling short term what is growing muscle or not. what the average person can tell, is how retentive a product is and those products then get a reputation as being the best mass builders. nandrolone, dbol, anadrol. all the massive water weight compounds where the scales fly up. anything that produces skeletal muscle gains in the region of like 100g per week is below the +/- error on most home scales, so can only be reasonably seen after long cycles. if you look at any sufficiently dosed cycle, say 10-15mg/kg/bw of gear 8 weeks after you've come off and all the temp adaptations have left, leaving only protein accretion, then you're left with basically the same few lbs of muscle regardless of what you're taking.

 

[readalot]

then basic common sense should apply. every one of the compounds released to market for human use are equal to, or more anabolic than testosterone because if they were not they would lack the androgenic:anabolic separation to justify not just throwing testosterone at the problems.

if we are operating in the realms of 5-10g of full body protein accretion per day, then your average person has zero way of telling short term what is growing muscle or not. what the average person can tell, is how retentive a product is and those products then get a reputation as being the best mass builders. nandrolone, dbol, anadrol. all the massive water weight compounds where the scales fly up. anything that produces skeletal muscle gains in the region of like 100g per week is below the +/- error on most home scales, so can only be reasonably seen after long cycles. if you look at any sufficiently dosed cycle, say 10-15mg/kg/bw of gear 8 weeks after you've come off and all the temp adaptations have left, leaving only protein accretion, then you're left with basically the same few lbs of muscle regardless of what you're taking.

Thanks for posting those snippets. May want to list the references as well. I run very low carb year round so pretty easy to devolute the water weight from true skeletal muscle gain. Your points are well taken. Also hard to separate muscle gain from the more subjective CNS effects. The strength gains are easily quantifiable.

My ranking so far in terms of performance and cosmetic/muscle effects (mg for mg all with Test in the mix):

Oxandrolone ~ nandrolone > stanozolol (joints not could handle for long) > masteron

Masteron and stanozolol clearly had the least mental sides. Too bad more sides (mental/blood work) come along with more cosmetic gainz.

Get that yearly ekg/echo guys.

 

[verylargeshoes]

then basic common sense should apply. every one of the compounds released to market for human use are equal to, or more anabolic than testosterone because if they were not they would lack the androgenic:anabolic separation to justify not just throwing testosterone at the problems.

In what senses are you using the word "anabolism"? This sounds like you're saying that every compound in question was "released to market for human use" with the goal of producing muscle growth.

Your reasoning would also imply that e.g. Proviron and Turinabol are more anabolic than testosterone in practice.

Anyway, Masteron was used for antitumor effects in breast tissue. The degree to which it is anabolic didn't really matter to that application.

I have no opinion or data about how anabolic Masteron is -- just not quite following this reasoning.

 

[dick_starbuck]

then basic common sense should apply. every one of the compounds released to market for human use are equal to, or more anabolic than testosterone because if they were not they would lack the androgenic:anabolic separation to justify not just throwing testosterone at the problems.

if we are operating in the realms of 5-10g of full body protein accretion per day, then your average person has zero way of telling short term what is growing muscle or not. what the average person can tell, is how retentive a product is and those products then get a reputation as being the best mass builders. nandrolone, dbol, anadrol. all the massive water weight compounds where the scales fly up. anything that produces skeletal muscle gains in the region of like 100g per week is below the +/- error on most home scales, so can only be reasonably seen after long cycles. if you look at any sufficiently dosed cycle, say 10-15mg/kg/bw of gear 8 weeks after you've come off and all the temp adaptations have left, leaving only protein accretion, then you're left with basically the same few lbs of muscle regardless of what you're taking.

No disrespect but your overall premise is wrong lol.

These compounds were created and released to provide the benefits of androgen therapy, without virilization to the androgen sensitive. Not to be as anabolic as testosterone. Most of these drugs were released to treat breast cancer, not get the broads jacked af.

Also, I tried masteron in high doses using the same protocol with primo and with eq. Both primo and eq had noticeable effects while the mast didnt. After 20 weeks I should be able to see some progress bud. Sorry.

 

[readalot]

Case in point...

Revalor-XS

Revalor-XS for Animal Use - Drugs.com

Learn about Revalor-XS for Animal Use including: active ingredients, directions for use, precautions, and storage information.

www.drugs.com

REVALOR®-XS | Merck Animal Health USA

Gives feedlot steers the exact dose they need to help them grow heavier throughout the entire finishing period without re-implanting.

www.merck-animal-health-usa.com

Some decent studies on this as well.

E2 with the tren acetate really does improve hang weight.

 

[AlexDavis43]

The problem I have with Dr Todd Lee is he flip flops all the time and talks in "absolutes". Example, he says deca will rot your brain, yet if you look at his old videos (only two years ago) he talks about putting on mass with big ass doses of deca. So either his brain has rotted out or he is regurgitating some animal study or another "fitness" influencer.

100%

Will say anything to have a steady stream of content to have a steady stream of income

Just like all of 'em

Entertainment not education

 

[bananafeet]

What we need is for someone to make two unlabelled vials:
1. Estrogen Cypionate and masteron enanthate blend
2. Testosterone enanthate

Ask someone to mix them up and hand a vial blindly to them. Do a cycle at 300-500mg per week for 12 weeks and compare the results.

Then do the same cycle again but with the other vial.

After both have been done the user will report which worked better for him anecdotally and then reveal which compound was which.

 

[eery]

bennett et al 1972 - hormone therapy of breast cancer with special reference to masteril therapy
View attachment 334153

View attachment 334154
receptor expression via Houtmana et al vs DHT, then expressed as X time that of test

View attachment 334156

the whole point and reason in developing these drugs was for AR expression in the tissues you want, with reduced androgenicity. if they weren't more anabolic than testosterone, they have no reason to exist.

can we see some references? i dont think we can extrapolate non-human findings to us if they are based off of rats or mice.