Nolva or clomid for pct

cathex

New Member
Is it possible to use nolva for pct instead of clomid, I've heard that it is. The reason I ask is that I've also heard that clomid can send you a bit phsycho while you're taking it.

If it is possible, can you suggest dosage and frequency. Assume an 8 - 10 wk deca test cycle @ 400mg/wk and 500mg/wk respectively.

Also, can anyone show a link to a good steroid ebook download site.
 
cathex said:
Is it possible to use nolva for pct instead of clomid, I've heard that it is. The reason I ask is that I've also heard that clomid can send you a bit phsycho while you're taking it.

If it is possible, can you suggest dosage and frequency. Assume an 8 - 10 wk deca test cycle @ 400mg/wk and 500mg/wk respectively.

Also, can anyone show a link to a good steroid ebook download site.

Yes you can run nolva instead of clomid for PCT. As for the mentioned cycle I would the Nolva at 40mg ED for weeks 12-15 providing it is a 10 week cycle.

If you are having these kinds of questions it sounds like you need to do some research
 
i feel clomid along with nolvadex is the best choice..
here is part of a pct thread posted by pheedno..

Now IMO, selective estrogen receptor modulators(SERMs) such as Clomiphine and Tamoxifen are selective to which tissues they bind too. Clomid being selective to the suprapituitary, while Tamox is selective to breast, bone, and liver ERs. I've come to this conclusion based on the comparison of studies on both SERMs. In every study showing benefit to HPTA from tamoxifin, the duration of the administration is 3-12months(This includes studies cited by William Llewellyn in his Nolva vs Clomid article). In studies showing levels of LH, FSH, and Testosterone checked after short durations of tamox, they were either insignificant, or their was an actual drop. I believe this is because tamox selectively works at the mammery(as well as bone and liver), thus taking longer for LH stimulation to occur.
With clomid, benefit to gonadotrophin concentrations, LH, FSH, and serum testosterone can be seen in short periods of 2-6wks. Because of the apparent selective nature of the two, and given our usual PCT duration, clomid is by far superior at LH stimulation than Nolva. Now both is the wise choice for a couple of reasons:

1. Nolva acts as the preventive measure to the estrogen flux
occured PC while clomid is the primary LH stimulator(Even more so in the case an AI is not used).
2. If your running a longer PCT, clomid needs to be discontinued after a while as it has been shown to desensitize GnRH, this due, IMO, to it's selective nature to the suprapituitary. In the longer forms of PCT, the clomid will be phased out, leaving Nolva and L-dex
 
nolva or clomid is fine but for longer harsh cycles (ten and deca come to mind) I think you should run both together after running hcg.

for those who tell you to research it is hard to do since everyone has an opinion about nolva or clomid that it is hard to get a good answer to base a decision on.

for a short cycle just run one or the other
 
byp00 said:
I don't wanna be bad wan I say to go search :) it's just because we have about 2-3 a day about this...


I understand and it is a good thing to tell them - but trying to get a good answer on clomid vs nolva is tough - even the experts cant agree on that.
 
Deacon said:
I understand and it is a good thing to tell them - but trying to get a good answer on clomid vs nolva is tough - even the experts cant agree on that.

I am not sure which is the absolute best to run for PCT. However, what I have always done, and I have gotten tremendous PCT results from, is to run Clomid 100/100/100 starting 2 weeks after my last injection. I feel this protocol is an excellent method for reestablishing the HPTA post cycle, and I recommend it to my friends and everyone else on Meso. Is it the absolute best method??? I dunno. Is it an outstanding method?? Yes it is.

dumbbellpress Dallas Cowboys - America's Team

Future Husband of Jennifer Love Hewitt
 
I prefer Nolva, that's what I have always used PCT and during a cycle and it has always worked great for me.
 
Can someone post the link for him on the article that says Nolva would be a better choice. I believe the link was in someones signature.
 
THANKS N4CER!!!!!!!!!!! its in his sig......LP

Clomid, Nolvadex and Testosterone Stimulation
By William Llewellyn


Editors Note: I am extremely pleased to have Bill Llewellyn contributing an article for us this week. For those who are unaware, he is the author of Anabolics 2000 and Anabolics 2002 and is one of the bodybuilding world's foremost experts on androgens and anabolics. He is also the President of Molecular Nutrition, one of the most innovative companies in this business. Along with Avant Labs and ErgoPharm, Molecular Nutrition is one of the few companies dedicated to putting forth only those products backed by legitimate research, rather than excessive hype and other such B.S. Two products, in particular, that deserve to be more well-known are Viritase, a potent anti-estrogen, and Boldione, a boldenone precursor. To find out more about these, and the rest of their products, I reccomend that you head over to their website -- but only after you have finsished reading big Mf'r and spent all of your money on our products, of course :)


Now, on to the article:




Introduction


I have received a lot of heat lately about my preference for Nolvadex over Clomid, which I hold for all purposes of use (in the bodybuilding world anyway); as an anti-estrogen, an HDL (good) cholesterol-supporting drug, and as a testosterone-stimulating compound. Most people use Nolvadex to combat gynecomastia over Clomid anyway, so that is an easy sell. And for cholesterol, well, most bodybuilders unfortunately pay little attention to this important issue, so by way of disinterest, another easy opinion to discuss. But when it comes to using Nolvadex for increasing endogenous testosterone release, bodybuilders just do not want to hear it. They only seem to want Clomid. I can only guess that this is based on a long rooted misunderstanding of the actions of the two drugs. In this article I would therefore like to discuss the specifics for these two agents, and explain clearly the usefulness of Nolvadex for the specific purpose of increasing testosterone production.





Clomid and Nolvadex


I am not sure how Clomid and Nolvadex became so separated in the minds of bodybuilders. They certainly should not be. Clomid and Nolvadex are both anti-estrogens belonging to the same group of triphenylethylene compounds. They are structurally related and specifically classified as selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) with mixed agonistic and antagonistic properties. This means that in certain tissues they can block the effects of estrogen, by altering the binding capacity of the receptor, while in others they can act as actual estrogens, activating the receptor. In men, both of these drugs act as anti-estrogens in their capacity to oppose the negative feedback of estrogens on the hypothalamus and stimulate the heightened release of GnRH (Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone). LH output by the pituitary will be increased as a result, which in turn can increase the level of testosterone by the testes. Both drugs do this, but for some reason bodybuilders persist in thinking that Clomid is the only drug good at stimulating testosterone. What you will find with a little investigation however is that not only is Nolvadex useful for the same purpose, it should actually be the preferred agent of the two.

Studies conducted in the late 1970's at the University of Ghent in Belgium make clear the advantages of using Nolvadex instead of Clomid for increasing testosterone levels (1). Here, researchers looked the effects of Nolvadex and Clomid on the endocrine profiles of normal men, as well as those suffering from low sperm counts (oligospermia). For our purposes, the results of these drugs on hormonally normal men are obviously the most relevant. What was found, just in the early parts of the study, was quite enlightening. Nolvadex, used for 10 days at a dosage of 20mg daily, increased serum testosterone levels to 142% of baseline, which was on par with the effect of 150mg of Clomid daily for the same duration (the testosterone increase was slightly, but not significantly, better for Clomid). We must remember though that this is the effect of three 50mg tablets of Clomid. With the price of both a 50mg Clomid and 20mg Nolvadex typically very similar, we are already seeing a cost vs. results discrepancy forming that strongly favors the Nolvadex side.


Pituitary Sensitivity to GnRH


But something more interesting is happening. Researchers were also conducting GnRH stimulation tests before and after various points of treatment with Nolvadex and Clomid, and the two drugs had markedly different results. These tests involved infusing patients with 100mcg of GnRH and measuring the output of pituitary LH in response. The focus of this test is to see how sensitive the pituitary is to Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone. The more sensitive the pituitary, the more LH will be released. The tests showed that after ten days of treatment with Nolvadex, pituitary sensitivity to GnRH increased slightly compared to pre-treated values. This is contrast to 10 days of treatment with 150mg Clomid, which was shown to consistently DECREASE pituitary sensitivity to GnRH (more LH was released before treatment). As the study with Nolvadex progresses to 6 weeks, pituitary sensitivity to GnRH was significantly higher than pre-treated or 10-day levels. At this point the same 20mg dosage was also raising testosterone and LH levels to an average of 183% and 172% of base values, respectively, which again is measurably higher than what was noted 10 days into therapy. Within 10 days of treatment Clomid is already exerting an effect that is causing the pituitary to become slightly desensitized to GnRH, while prolonged use of Nolvadex serves only to increase pituitary sensitivity to this hormone. That is not to say Clomid won't increase testosterone if taken for the same 6 week time period. Quite the opposite is true. But we are, however, noticing an advantage in Nolvadex.



The Estrogen Clomid


The above discrepancies are likely explained by differences in the estrogenic nature of the two compounds. The researchers' clearly support this theory when commenting in their paper, "The difference in response might be attributable to the weak intrinsic estrogenic effect of Clomid, which in this study manifested itself by an increase in transcortin and testosterone/estradiol-binding globulin [SHBG] levels; this increase was not observed after tamoxifen treatment". In reviewing other theories later in the paper, such as interference by increased androgen or estrogen levels, they persist in noting that increases in these hormones were similar with both drug treatments, and state that," a role of the intrinsic estrogenic activity of Clomid which is practically absent in Tamoxifen seems the most probable explanation".

Although these two are related anti-estrogens, they appear to act very differently at different sites of action. Nolvadex seems to be strongly anti-estrogenic at both the hypothalamus and pituitary, which is in contrast to Clomid, which although a strong anti-estrogen at the hypothalamus, seems to exhibit weak estrogenic activity at the pituitary. To find further support for this we can look at an in-vitro animal study published in the American Journal of Physiology in February 1981 (2). This paper looks at the effects of Clomid and Nolvadex on the GnRH stimulated release of LH from cultured rat pituitary cells. In this paper, it was noted that incubating cells with Clomid had a direct estrogenic effect on cultured pituitary cell sensitivity, exerting a weaker but still significant effect compared to estradiol. Nolvadex on the other hand did not have any significant effect on LH response. Furthermore it mildly blocked the effects of estrogen when both were incubated in the same culture.



Conclusion


To summarize the above research succinctly, Nolvadex is the more purely anti-estrogenic of the two drugs, at least where the HPTA (Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Testicular Axis) is concerned. This fact enables Nolvadex to offer the male bodybuilder certain advantages over Clomid. This is especially true at times when we are looking to restore a balanced HPTA, and would not want to desensitize the pituitary to GnRH. This could perhaps slow recovery to some extent, as the pituitary would require higher amounts of hypothalamic GnRH in the presence of Clomid in order to get the same level of LH stimulation.

Nolvadex also seems preferred from long-term use, for those who find anti-estrogens effective enough at raising testosterone levels to warrant using as anabolics. Here Nolvadex would seem to provide a better and more stable increase in testosterone levels, and likely will offer a similar or greater effect than Clomid for considerably less money. The potential rise in SHBG levels with Clomid, supported by other research (3), is also cause for concern, as this might work to allow for comparably less free active testosterone compared to Nolvadex as well. Ultimately both drugs are effective anti-estrogens for the prevention of gyno and elevation of endogenous testosterone, however the above research provides enough evidence for me to choose Nolvadex every time.
 
i def prefer nolva over clomid......unless you want to see floaters in ur eyes, and feel like you need a hug,,,,,LOL....stay with nolva....LP
 
Everytime I see the Llewellyin article, I have to reply. it's incredibly misleading. All of the studies that show nolva's "superiority" to clomid were for ridiculously long durations of time (BTW he only managed to selectively cite the three ancient studies that ever found any advantage to using nolva vs clomid, while omitting the vast majority of literature showing clomid's superiority).
The studies Llewellyn cites are 3-12 month durations. All of the studies showing acute effects on gonadotropin favor clomid. it is far more efficient at increasing LH and therefore test levels. there is no debate on this. the studies have been posted and discussed numerous times. The only argument for nolva over clomid then is the clomid ocular sides or "mood swings", which only are present with some users, of which I am not one.
You'll often hear "nolva works fine for me". Yes, I suppose it may, but clomid works better for the purposes for which we're taking it and the durations that are practical....indebatable.
 
i wouldnt argue with you einstein....but for me, the sides that i get from clomid are not worth it....if i can get good results from using nolva, then why deal with the vision problems, acne, psychlogical issues, that come from the use of clomid.....LP
 
latinpride1 said:
i wouldnt argue with you einstein....but for me, the sides that i get from clomid are not worth it....if i can get good results from using nolva, then why deal with the vision problems, acne, psychlogical issues, that come from the use of clomid.....LP
No, I understand what you're saying, and that's a valid point. If you're going to argue in favor of nolva, the potential sides are the only ammo there is. However, too many people try to make the argument that nolva is more efficient at increasing test, usually it's the Llewellyin article to which they refer to support this. I just want to reiterate that this article is worse than modern day media reporting. Selectively citing literature only to support your predetermined (and incorrect) claim is irresponsible. There's no way that he could have not stumbled onto the bulk of literature to support the contrary argument, that being in favor of clomid.
 
what are your thoughts on the reports claiming that nolva helps improve your lipid profile? im asking because it def would be a great thing for all of us aas users......LP
 
latinpride1 said:
what are your thoughts on the reports claiming that nolva helps improve your lipid profile? im asking because it def would be a great thing for all of us aas users......LP
Nolva definitely helps to improve lipid profiles. It's an estrogen receptor agonist in the bone and liver, so it acts as estrogen their. It both increases HDL as well as decreases LDL. It should always be used with any cycle (with an AI).
 
ok so how would you recommend its use if its for helping with your lipid profile...

at what doses, and for what length of time......? and thanks for all your help and advice....LP
 
latinpride1 said:
ok so how would you recommend its use if its for helping with your lipid profile...

at what doses, and for what length of time......? and thanks for all your help and advice....LP
During any cycle, I use at least .25mg/day of Adex and 10mg/day of nolva. However, increasing the nolva to 20mg/day is fine and beneficial in many cases...there isn't really a down side for males. policosanol is another excellent choice to help lipid profiles, and it's OTC. Oats are great for lowering LDL. Cardio and a clean diet are number 1.
 
yeah i started using policosanol this cycle, only because i just found out about it...or i would have a long time ago.....i also use fish oil, a fiber powder, and niacin.......next cycle im def gonna add 10mg of nolva...whats the point of all of this, we are not healthy at end......thanks again for your help einstein.....LP
 
This is it

byp00 said:
a lot of article about it... do your search please.

Thanks for the advice but what do you think this is if it's not learning. I wouldn't dream of taking anything unless I was as clear as I could be on how and how much to use.

Thanks for anyways dood.
 
I knew einstein would get in on this and I am glad he did he makes some very good points as always -

I myself prefer nolva over clomid and it actually works better for me.

But this cycle I will be using both due to the drugs taken and length of the cycle itself. This has been highly suggested to me by some close friends who are very knowledgable on pct.
 

Sponsors

Latest posts

Back
Top