Steroid Profile Equipoise

[bilbobagginz101]

Wanted to put forward a little unconventional remedy for EQ anxiety that was suggested by my gym's resident mad-science-Dad - low dose Dbol. Just 5mg either every day or EoD.

I've been trialling it the last few weeks, and gotta say, its been surprisingly effective at mellowing not just the EQ, but life in general. Whether that's due to the bump in Estrogen, Methyl-E (?), or Dbol's GABAnergic properties idk, but as someone who normally needs an aramada of supps and strategies to curb EQ angst, this has been a magic bullet.

 

[bigboy9]

I personally like eq and get on great with it, I get increased vascularity, increase in strength and cardio, it doesn't blow me up like other compounds, I get the hunger effect from it.

Needs to be ran for 16+ weeks in my opinion and can be really impacting on rbc, others have also reported anxiety on it.

Pros
Good steady gains.
Increased vascularity.
Increase in hunger(can also be a con).

Cons
Needs to be ran for long duration to truly see it shine.
Big impact on rbc bloods must be donated.
Possible anxiety.

 

[Bunyon]

What have you guys found to be the lowest dose you can take while still getting a good cardio/endurance benefit? 200mg?

 

[AlexDavis43]

What have you guys found to be the lowest dose you can take while still getting a good cardio/endurance benefit? 200mg?

200 mg per day or what

don't be a pussy

 

[bigboy9]

What have you guys found to be the lowest dose you can take while still getting a good cardio/endurance benefit? 200mg?

I'd say there'd definitely be an endurance benefit at 200mg per week, again as I said above you need to run it for 16+ weeks to truly see eqs benefits.

 

[lonewolf54321]

200 mg per day or what

don't be a pussy

Chase irons that shit and do 5000 mg lol

 

[Klimmzugernie]

EQ is so damn kindey toxic. It can nothing do for you which other compounts cannot do.

 

[asaly]

EQ is so damn kindey toxic. It can nothing do for you which other compounts cannot do.

it is probably the least toxic AAS after testosterone

 

[asaly]

Chase irons that shit and do 5000 mg lol

He use 5000mg test not EQ, he was never fan of EQ

 

[Klimmzugernie]

it is probably the least toxic AAS after testosterone

Bullshit

 

[asaly]

this is an obvious fact, described in detail on this forum

The myth of the harmfulness of boldenone comes from the fact that, as a popular veterinary drug, there have been many studies on animals that describe nothing except that all steroids are toxic.

the best are people who think that increasing hematorcyte is a symptom of toxicity and not a normal feature of steroids for which they were created

 

[Klimmzugernie]

Still bullshit

 

[Klimmzugernie]

One of douzen. Evaluation of anabolic steroid induced renal damage with sonography in bodybuilders - PubMed

 

[asaly]

One of douzen. Evaluation of anabolic steroid induced renal damage with sonography in bodybuilders - PubMed

I said that this topic had already been described, here is a very thorough analysis of this study by Dr. Peter Bond

Overall: the English is really poor, makes it a horrendous read and sometimes I'm unsure what's meant. This on its own should already be a red flag: good quality papers are written in proper English. (It's also a low-tier journal in which it's published.)

The authors write: "Data were collected prospectively during medical inspection form the steroid schema, diet lists, blood and spot urine tests and ultrasound results."
I'm not entirely sure what they mean by "during medical inspection form the steroid schema", but regardless, where is this data? I can only find data measured at a single point in time. There is no prospective data. Only measurements at the end of the 12th week are reported.
Either way: this is cross-sectional, not prospective.

There are 2 groups who self-administered AAS, they were not prescribed. How big is the chance that you're gonna find 8 people doing the exact same cycle A and 7 people doing the exact same cycle B to participate in your study? If it's just 500 mg testosterone, sure, with some effort. But:
Group 1 - 12 weeks of:
500 mg testosterone enanthate weekly
400 mg nandrolone decanoate weekly
40 mg methandienone daily
or Group 2 - 16 weeks of:
500 mg testosterone enanthate weekly
300 mg nandrolone decanoate weekly
300 mg boldenone undecylenate weekly
?

Moreover, they did not test the compounds of the participants. The black market AAS is full of crap. They only tested serum testosterone and gonadotropin values. The first was increased and the latter was suppressed. So all we know is that both groups took AAS, including testosterone. But other than that..? God knows.

And how were the participants recruited? This is not reported (sigh). For all we know the subjects in the boldenone group were a group of friends who had something else in common that gave them big kidneys...

The authors also write:
"Twenty two healthy, resistance-trained male volunteers who were using anabolic steroids and feeding with high-protein diets were included in the study."
There were 8 subjects in group 1, 7 in group 2, and another 7 in group 3 ('control'). Does this mean the control gorup also used anabolic steroids? But just not when the measurements were taken or something?

And:
"Testosterone levels were over 15ng/ml and FSH and LH levels were both below 0.100 mIU/ml in all subjects supporting depression of pituitary-gonadal axis."
So the subjects in the control group DID take testosterone?

General signs of sloppiness; kidney volume was calculated by "length x width x depth / 2". Why not multiply by pi / 6 instead of dividing by 2? Like the rest of the world does and how it should be done. It doesn't make that much difference in the end result, but why on earth would you make your calculations less accurate by simplifying a simplified formula even further?
The provided reference range for BUN is "0-38 mg/dL", it's not
The provided reference range for creatinine is "0-0.9 mg/dL", it's not

The parenchymal thickness measurements were either done wrong or the subjects in group 1 and 3 have an issue. Parenchymal thickness is usually between 15 and 20 mm (where the boldenone group fit in). The other groups had a parenchymal thickness of 12 mm.
The renal volumes of the other 2 groups are on the low end as well, although obviously not abnormal. (Group 2 kidney volume is indeed abnormal.)

Finally, if this study made you believe boldenone causes kidney damage, then you should also be inclined to think it causes a lot of weight gain. The boldenone group was 11 kg heavier than the other AAS group while sharing the same height (albeit that this large difference was not statistically significantly different from the other 2 groups).
"BuT BaSeLiNe MeAsUrEmEnTs WeRe NoT rEpOrTeD", exactly, neither were they for all kidney measurements.

You cannot possibly attribute an effect to a certain steroid in a cross-sectional study in which the participants self-adminstered AAS without testing the substances they administer. Let alone in a poorly done study like this one. (I have more comments about this paper, but jesus.)

 

[Klimmzugernie]

Deterioration of glomerular endothelial surface layer and the alteration in the renal function after a growth promoter boldenone injection in rabbits - PubMed

Boldenone is an anabolic steroid developed for veterinary use. Recently, it is used by bodybuilders in both off-season and precontest, where it is well known for increasing vascularity while preparing for a bodybuilding contest. However, the side effect of this steroid on the human health is...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Full paper: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0960327111420745

The study was carried out on rats, but this is at least enough to doubt the safety of boldenone and to expose your statement that boldenone is the safest after testosterone as complete nonsense.

Peter ist smart but not free of failures.

 

[asaly]

Deterioration of glomerular endothelial surface layer and the alteration in the renal function after a growth promoter boldenone injection in rabbits - PubMed

Boldenone is an anabolic steroid developed for veterinary use. Recently, it is used by bodybuilders in both off-season and precontest, where it is well known for increasing vascularity while preparing for a bodybuilding contest. However, the side effect of this steroid on the human health is...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Full paper: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0960327111420745

The study was carried out on rats, but this is at least enough to doubt the safety of boldenone and to expose your statement that boldenone is the safest after testosterone as complete nonsense.

Peter ist smart but not free of failures.

and what does this study give? It only says that boldenone is toxic to the kidneys, which is logical, every steroid is toxic to the kidneys, even testosterone

We have comparative studies on rabbits where nandrolone is at least as toxic to the kidneys as boldenone ("Effect of Nandrolone Decanoate, Boldenone Undecylenate on Renal Status of Rabbits")

And we are talking about nandrolone here, which is the best-tested compound after tesoteron and is not considered highly toxic, and yet we know that it damages blood vessels, while boldenone does not. In addition, there are also sexual side effects of nandrolone

We have so many famous studies on the effect of boldenone on the kidneys of animals, but no one has done so many studies on, for example, the effect of primo or masteron on the kidneys because they have no veterinary use and their medical use was mainly for the treatment of cancer, so no one was particularly concerned about it.

 

[asaly]

first of all, we forget that boldenone was a drug for osteoporosis, therefore we have good studies in humans, where no terrible effects on the kidneys were described or other examples of high toxicity

 

[Klimmzugernie]

first of all, we forget that boldenone was a drug for osteoporosis, therefore we have good studies in humans, where no terrible effects on the kidneys were described or other examples of high toxicity

And because everything is close to perfect it has been removed from the market because of evil Pharma companys

 

[asaly]

And because everything is close to perfect it has been removed from the market because of evil Pharma companys

it simply has no use for humans in medicine because it has no interesting properties that compounds with a better anabolic androgenic ratio would not have

no one produces masterone also, even veterinarians, for the same reason

 

[RaddishPork]

I've come to the conclusion that I should not do any stacks without EQ. It really helps mitigate physical sides. I can run ment and deca much more easily without having to worry about gyno or buku water retention.

I've tried swapping it out for masteron multiple times. Even though masteron makes me feel great mentally, it doesn't stop the physical sides that i mentioned.

Cardio was always my natural strength so EQ doesn't change a whole lot there. Even when I'm off-cycle my RBC is barely in range. EQ tips it from "high" into the "too high" range.

I don't get the intense hunger from EQ like some people say, but I also don't take more than 400mg a week. Overall I consider it more of an accessory drug. I know it's not the main course in my cycles but it has its purpose and has proven to be reliable multiple times for me.