Masteron vs Primo Advance Discussion

[I6JQdr06]

So who do we believe now? Nobody is presenting any evidence just claims?

Believe the published peer reviewed research, and the people who back up their claims with citations.

 

[DECLAN]

Believe the published peer reviewed research, and the people who back up their claims with citations.

Where do I find these things lol. I'm such a noob lmao. I just want to know if I can use primo as a mild ai when I titrate my test rather than use aromasin, I've been using masteron as to control high e2 on my cut and it worked, now I'm switching to primo on my upcoming bulk.

So, as I deduced from anecdotal bro science from fellow forum users based on their blood work, primo lowered their e2. The video further supported that claim so u figured it was true since those guys sounded legit being a doctor, pro and researcher working under a pharmaceutical company.

Their credentials and being out in the open ready to be criticized and challenged if they're spewing bullshit convinced me their information is reliable. Now, the forum experts say it's false? Now I'm confused lol.

 

[Mongo966]

For the primo users what was your cholesterol like before and during use? My hdl was naturally very high, like the highest the doc had ever seen. Primo has absolutely trashed it.

200mg Primo cuts my HDL roughly in half. My HDL is borderline low as it is. It's a real shame because it's the only obvious side effect I get from primo, but it's a side effect I'm not willing to deal with. Heart disease runs in my family.

 

[fooba]

Where do I find these things lol. I'm such a noob lmao. I just want to know if I can use primo as a mild ai when I titrate my test rather than use aromasin, I've been using masteron as to control high e2 on my cut and it worked, now I'm switching to primo on my upcoming bulk.

So, as I deduced from anecdotal bro science from fellow forum users based on their blood work, primo lowered their e2. The video further supported that claim so u figured it was true since those guys sounded legit being a doctor, pro and researcher working under a pharmaceutical company.

Their credentials and being out in the open ready to be criticized and challenged if they're spewing bullshit convinced me their information is reliable. Now, the forum experts say it's false? Now I'm confused lol.

i dont think anyone here is disputing that primo can lower e2.

its more so about the claims made without citation.

 

[BigTomJ]

I just want to know if I can use primo as a mild ai when I titrate my test rather than use aromasin, I've been using masteron as to control high e2 on my cut and it worked, now I'm switching to primo on my upcoming bulk.

The only way to know is to check via bloodwork.

Get bloods done on a set dose of testosterone without an AI and see your aromatization rate.

Then do it again with the same dose of test, with some primo and confirm wether or not you are one of the individuals that see lowered e2 on primo.


This phenomenon is entirely individual, some people absolutely see an AI like effect on primo, others do not at all. It's 100% individual and we have no concrete ideas for the mechanism by which this happens.

 

[Avarice911]

So who do we believe now? Nobody is presenting any evidence just claims?

Not sure. I just go by what seems to be the collective anecdote of most people. I don’t really overthink my gh. Just take it at night and sometimes in the morning if I know I’m gonna do fasted cardio. Seems to work so I see no need to complicate that

 

[GuerillaPete]

What ever happened o trying things out for yourself and getting the correct answer for you?
Primo acts like an ai for most people to a different degree .
Masteron acts like a serm.
Where is the debate? What is not clear? What am i missing?

 

[I6JQdr06]

If you look at the literature there’s a certain amount of evidence that Masteron acts as an estrogen receptor antagonist or otherwise disrupts the process of binding and gene transcription, but this the claim is also disputed in subsequent studies.

At the end of the day it’s not fully clear if it does or doesn’t intefere with estrogen receptor activation, and in what tissues the effect occurs.

 

[Avarice911]

What ever happened o trying things out for yourself and getting the correct answer for you?
Primo acts like an ai for most people to a different degree .
Masteron acts like a serm.
Where is the debate? What is not clear? What am i missing?

Agreed. The paralysis by analysis had been a pain for me. Found that there’s only so much “prep” I can do till I hit a wall and only way to understand it better or get answers is to just jump in and try it

 

[DECLAN]

The only way to know is to check via bloodwork.

Get bloods done on a set dose of testosterone without an AI and see your aromatization rate.

Then do it again with the same dose of test, with some primo and confirm wether or not you are one of the individuals that see lowered e2 on primo.


This phenomenon is entirely individual, some people absolutely see an AI like effect on primo, others do not at all. It's 100% individual and we have no concrete ideas for the mechanism by which this happens.

That is what was said in the video. Todd Lee stated the results of his blood work. That's why I'm confused.

Anyway, I understand it now.

 

[GuerillaPete]

If you look at the literature there’s a certain amount of evidence that Masteron acts as an estrogen receptor antagonist or otherwise disrupts the process of binding and gene transcription, but this the claim is also disputed in subsequent studies.

At the end of the day it’s not fully clear if it does or doesn’t intefere with estrogen receptor activation, and in what tissues the effect occurs.

If you run Mast with high testosteron and your bloods show high estradiol,a high level that would normally cause estrogenic side effects like water retention,gyno,ED but you are not experiencing them its a clear enough indicator that its acting on the estrogenic receptors.
It is true that we don't know all the details but even if we did it would not change your results with said compound.
I personally like to mix them get the best of both worlds.
Use enough Primo so estradiol is at the maximum tolerable amount and fill the rest of my anabolic need with Masteron.
I think the video suggests something similar.
Maybe this is the reason some experience dry joints(cracking) with Masteron and even Winstrol that seems like a stronger Masteron.

 

[Type-IIx]

BTW @Type-IIx the PhD candidate also has an ebook on HGH already published offered on anabolic bodybuilding channel, so he beat you on releasing the literature lol.

I don't know how it is since I didn't buy it for I don't use hgh yet.

That's OK. I doubt that it beats me to the punch, my book being a high quality practical & reference guide not intended to be pumped out at high volumes to YouTube viewers to make a buck, but rather to bring a paradigm change to how bodybuilders view GH/IGF-I, rhGH, Ghrelin mimetics & GH-releasing hormone agonists and consider use from a risk perspective.

 

[Type-IIx]

So, how do you refute this claims then? If you think they spreading misinformation or the research Kurt claims to be part of is wrong, is there a way for you to reach out to them? Maybe comment on their page?

As a layman and gym enthusiast, I just want honest reliable information from the common widespread platforms. I would like to see a debate from different sources on who is saying the truth now.

I refute them in the very post you quoted here, what I think you're asking is for me to debate them. The onus is on the speaker(s) to support their claims with citations. If you'd like, I can refer you to a few boring metenolone metabolism studies, I wrote a book I want to get out there about how circulating (e.g., subcutaneously applied) IGF-I augments autocrine/paracrine IGF-I activity, basic physiology and metabolism and the distinction between aromatase & 5AR, et cetera comes from an understanding beyond a single study, etc.

 

[DECLAN]

I refute them in the very post you quoted here, what I think you're asking is for me to debate them. The onus is on the speaker(s) to support their claims with citations.

I guess, it's still trial and error at the end.

Nothing changed for me, I'm still gonna base my protocols on anecdotal experience or what works on most people, get what parameters you can get from bloodwork( access to private bloodwork is limited in my country), don't over analyze shit, keep it simple and go from there lol.

And you are right, I don't think they presented any evidence on their claims, however, to think of it nobody asked them of the data to support their findings yet. Maybe, it will be shown to the public soon.

 

[Type-IIx]

I guess, it's still trial and error at the end.

Nothing changed for me, I'm still gonna base my protocols on anecdotal experience or what works on most people, get what parameters you can get from bloodwork( access to private bloodwork is limited in my country), don't over analyze shit, keep it simple and go from there lol.

And you are right, I don't think they presented any evidence on their claims, however, to think of it nobody asked them of the data to support their findings yet. Maybe, it will be shown to the public soon.

Rely on that which is supported, without arm-bending, by citations. It's not all trial and error. As @BigTomJ wrote, YouTube videos cannot be relied upon.

 

[BigTomJ]

I guess, it's still trial and error at the end.

Nothing changed for me, I'm still gonna base my protocols on anecdotal experience or what works on most people, get what parameters you can get from bloodwork( access to private bloodwork is limited in my country), don't over analyze shit, keep it simple and go from there lol.

And you are right, I don't think they presented any evidence on their claims, however, to think of it nobody asked them of the data to support their findings yet. Maybe, it will be shown to the public soon.

that which can be asserted without evidence, can be refuted without evidence.

them saying anything or making any claims, without real evidence is the same as them saying nothing at all, regardless of their perceived credentials or how many fancy buzzwords they use.

 

[Type-IIx]

that which can be asserted without evidence, can be refuted without evidence.

them saying anything or making any claims, without real evidence is the same as them saying nothing at all, regardless of their perceived credentials or how many fancy buzzwords they use.

It was rather remarkable to see Todd Lee's ego take shape in this video, he actually became physically uncomfortable whenever he perceived that he was being outshone by Havens.

It was also as heavily geared towards marketing his practice and coaching services as could be, even humorously in his disclaimer proclaiming, "While I am a doctor, I am not your doctor... yet... if you'd like me to be click the link in the box... do not take this seriously... this is just for fun, kids." I'm not paraphrasing, see 2:47 - 2:56.

It's referred to as "Burying the lede." But he did contextualize that this video is just typical YouTube infotainment earnestly and transparently.

I, being unfamiliar with these guys until this point, basically like both of them, and think that Havens' proximity to modern laboratory equipment and familiarity with its use, and the freshness of (androgen) biochemistry still in his mind while doing his studies brought something valuable to the show, albeit briefly, before the host redirected the discussion elsewhere to not appear confused. Lee deserves to be able to market himself to an American audience, despite this being regarded as unprofessional – IMO, unfairly; but it is regarded as low-level unethical conduct to market your medical practice in this manner – as well as to take pride in his pertinent achievements: attaining his IFBB Pro card, as well as his M.D.

The only problem for me is a broader one, not fairly imbued singly in this host or channel, but rather that guys like DECLAN are on YouTube en masse and hold the mistaken impression that this format lends itself to venerated educational or practical value. Without slides & annotations being included that provide the reader with citations (this is done by many, of course), these "infotainment" videos are readily dismissible by viewers with a well-developed bullshit filter, honed by their own education and experience.

 

[Type-IIx]

The only interesting tidbit from this video for me was the mere mention of atamestane, a potent steroidal AI.

What's chemically intriguing about it, is that it is basically an intermediate drug between EQ & Primo.

At its core, it is an androsta-1,4-diene like EQ with a 1-methyl like Primo, and 3,17-keto like AD. It is 1-methyl-boldione.

 

[Trades]

So who do we believe now? Nobody is presenting any evidence just claims?

it's better to go with bro science because actual science changes its mind too quickly and can't find consensus.

maybe a better way of saying it is that real science isn't incentivized to find the answers that we're looking for, and at the end of the day you are your own n of 1 test subject.

 

[DECLAN]

It was rather remarkable to see Todd Lee's ego take shape in this video, he actually became physically uncomfortable whenever he perceived that he was being outshone by Havens.

It was also as heavily geared towards marketing his practice and coaching services as could be, even humorously in his disclaimer proclaiming, "While I am a doctor, I am not your doctor... yet... if you'd like me to be click the link in the box... do not take this seriously... this is just for fun, kids." I'm not paraphrasing, see 2:47 - 2:56.

It's referred to as "Burying the lede." But he did contextualize that this video is just typical YouTube infotainment earnestly and transparently.

I, being unfamiliar with these guys until this point, basically like both of them, and think that Havens' proximity to modern laboratory equipment and familiarity with its use, and the freshness of (androgen) biochemistry still in his mind while doing his studies brought something valuable to the show, albeit briefly, before the host redirected the discussion elsewhere to not appear confused. Lee deserves to be able to market himself to an American audience, despite this being regarded as unprofessional – IMO, unfairly; but it is regarded as low-level unethical conduct to market your medical practice in this manner – as well as to take pride in his pertinent achievements: attaining his IFBB Pro card, as well as his M.D.

The only problem for me is a broader one, not fairly imbued singly in this host or channel, but rather that guys like DECLAN are on YouTube en masse and hold the mistaken impression that this format lends itself to venerated educational or practical value. Without slides & annotations being included that provide the reader with citations (this is done by many, of course), these "infotainment" videos are readily dismissible by viewers with a well-developed bullshit filter, honed by their own education and experience.

Yeah, it's a challenge when you cannot interpret clinical data/research even if it's handed for you to read if don't have any inkling of idea on even how to understand it.

I'm not ashamed to admit I am indeed incapable of decipering the information even if you handed me the research paper in a platter lol, ergo I rely on the good faith of these experts/pros that they are being truthful and somewhat transparent on their sources.

That being said, it's easier to believe people who actually walk the walk rather than scientists who are just all research and no results. Being just a gym bro, most of us really don't dive into the intricate details of these things, we find what works safely for most and just piggy back off that and grow.

Thanks, for bringing clarity to the issue at hand, I always appreciate the helpful insights @Type-IIx .