PCT - Lets get it ironed out (Dr Scally?)

[Dr JIM]

Look at the "P" value for the study your using as a reason to NOT use ADEX!

1) The study cited was conducted using Letrozole
2) The "P" value was SF @ (0.002) compared to placebo
3) The study was designed to investigate the effect of Letrozole on "glucose metabolism and leptin levels"
4) The IGF changes were statistically significant but when one also considers the variability of IGF was so broad, approximating 300ng/ml, causation can NOT be ascertained.

For example contrast the younger patient control group IGF levels at,
study day ONE. The IGF average was 477+ -146 ng/ml
study day TWENTY EIGHT. The IGF average was 404 + - 143 ng/ml
THE AVERAGE change was a lowering of IGF by 73 ng/ml.

However considering a difference of as much as + - 150 ng/ml, not ALL NINE younger patients actually experienced a decline in IGF and in fact the data shown clearly suggests IGF actually INCREASED IN SOME YOUNGER PATIENTS.

What this means is the variance observed (some patients increased their IGF while others decreased it) is probably due to the patients themselves rather than the LETRO although perhaps in some younger males LETRO MAY be ASSOCIATED with a reduction on IGF, especially at HIGHER DOSES. (My contention since physiologically an decreasing E-2 suppresses GH secretion)

All that being said I seriously doubt a change of IGF of 10-15% would alter anabolism significantly much like similar changes in TT.

Thanks ASAF
JIM

 

[Dr JIM]

One last point. Look at the IGF variance in the younger patient PLACEBO cohort.
Why did they experience a difference as low as + - 53 ng/ml while the study cohort had an average of THREE TIMES that amount at ~ 150 ng/ml?

This data alone is highly suggestive of bias intentional or unintentional within the study design. The latter not being to surprising since IGF analysis was NOT a study objective.

A larger study with more patients and tighter control of variable might help clarify what effect if any AI's have on IGF levels

jim

 

[IRQ_001]

I came to 50mg conclusion based on the fact 100mg shot generally puts TT at about 800ng/dl

Therefore 50mg should put TT between 400-500ng/dl
(The conversion ratio lessens as doses increase therefore 50mg may be a little over 400)

This is a good environment to begin pct IMO clomid and nolva will still have a significant effect at this point and you are more likely to not allow your TT to fall below 300ng.

As for the test prop I would start the first injection on the day you would inject your test e approximately 4wks (your using 750mg not 500mg) before you plan to end your cycle. The first week should be half dose you were previously on. 2nd week 3/4 dose and from there full dose.

You don't want to spike your test levels. You could play with it and get the exact increase in mg day by day but that seems a bit excessive to me. This will be very effective and much simpler.

Thanks Ape! Dr Scally mentioned "I look to a TT 350+ with hCG as a marker for possible successful HPTA restoration". Therefore 50mg, where test is about 400ng/dl seems to be in parallel to what the Doc suggested.... I hope that I'm on the right track. If this is the case, the calculator is a little off. However, no studies were cited concluding that 350-450ng/dl is the optimal environment to start PCT before levels drop below the 300ng/dl marker and how will Clomid/nolva raise TT overnight/24hours to prevent levels dropping to lets say 200ng/dl where muscle loss is very possible. Any studies to cite? Sorry for being a pain but I hope to have this thread be the bible on understanding PCT with some solid info to support the suggestions.

With regards to Test prop, just to make sure I understand. Assuming a 14-week cycle and that my last Test E is on day 70 (10-week at 750mg/week), which lets say a Sunday. My next scheduled test E injection would be wednesday (day 73), however, on that day I take Test P EOD (day 73 -wednesday, day 75-friday, day 76-sunday, day 78-monday), until next monday at a dose of almost 100mg (400mg for that week which is a little over half the 750mg). The following four shots (week 12), will be at almost 150mg/shot which will come to a little more than 2/3 of 750, then the next 8 shots (week 13 and 14) at 200/mg per shot, which comes to almost 50mg more than my initial 750mg/week dose. On a 14-week cycle, my last injection would be on day 98 (7x14). If this is the case, on what day will I start PCT (where my TT is at 350-450ng/dl)? The calculator is limited and at that point i have no idea what my ex test level is.

Ape if my understanding is correct, damn you...you complicated my life. I'd rather lose my left nut [)]

Few questions:
1) why 4 weeks of test prop after last test E injection? is this because half lives from test E has come down significantly so that test P takes over for a swift PCT to start later?
2) why the 1/2 for week 11 then 2/3 for week 12 then full on dose for week 13 and 14 assuming a 14 week cycle? I'm guessing that once again because the half life of test E is longer therefore test stays in your blood longer and therefore preventing a spike...

By confirming the above, people that may come across this will have a better understanding of your suggestions.

I'm loving this!!!

 

[ApeShitFuckJacked]

Holy shit Dr. I like you and we see eye to eye on almost everything but unfortunately sometimes you do not even read the posts your responding to.

How many ways from Sunday can I say I receded my statement that Adex should not be used.

Why do you keep interjecting that I'm trying to back this statement when I have done the opposite?

I also explained that this study was letrozole and that I understood that.

I'm not trying to argue with you.

Please read my last post addressed to you. It had some useful information as to my views and reasoning for posts I have made to you and this thread.

 

[IRQ_001]

hahahahha.... Dr. Jim...Ape has made it clear that he no longer supports his previous statement regarding adex BEFORE you came back with more replies. Let's move beyond this point and concentrate on other important things. Lots of people are watching this thread...

 

[msanchez]

So, understanding dose affects when PCT should be started, at what exogenous test blood level should PCT be started?

For example, if you chart out the estimated level of test based on your injection schedule and the approximate half-life of the ester, what "level" is appropriate? When the exogenous test level is at 100, 50, etc?

 

[IRQ_001]

So, understanding dose affects when PCT should be started, at what exogenous test blood level should PCT be started?

For example, if you chart out the estimated level of test based on your injection schedule and the approximate half-life of the ester, what "level" is appropriate? When the exogenous test level is at 100, 50, etc?

when ex test is at about 50 as per the previous answers to this question. However, I'm yet to see a study suggesting that this is the best environment to start PCT. At this point, it's a belief(?) with no empirical support.

 

[BIGMESC]

Damn IRQ you are eating this stuff up.

A easy way to do it with the calculator is to put in the 750mg a week of test then determine the time between last pin of TE and start of PCT that is the amount of time you will run TP.

As far as ramping up the TP dose as TE clears to maintain a net of 750 a week I don't think it will matter that much because by that time in you cycle you will have reached the point of diminishing returns. Probably a waste of gear.

The main reason to finish with TP is a more comfortable transition to PCT and to minimize losses, by way of weeks of low t. IMO

As far as hitting the correct exogenous testosterone levels with this system is quite simple wait a couple 3 days after last pin and start pct.

 

[msanchez]

I've seen a test-tapering protocol elsewhere - for this exact purpose. It was written up by a nurse on a different forum years ago. I can link if interested.

Also, IRQ, what half-lives are you using? The PCT calc you cited in the first post used a 7 day half-life for Enanthate; I've read a study that puts it between 3-5 days. Any thoughts on this?

I think a big question is when the optimal state to start is, and like you said, there does not seem to be hard evidence on that number, either.

 

[BIGMESC]

Someone else posted this calculator up before.
Its a fun one to play around with also for steady blood levels

http://steroidplot.com/

 

[ApeShitFuckJacked]

I'm going to start a new thread and answer everything about pct to the best of my knowledge using dr scallys information.

I will also layout a full test example cycle at 500mg with the best way to include a deca option.

Sound good?

This thread has become cluttered with next to irrelevant information regarding igf-1 levels and AIs

I will talk to Millard about making it a sticky if the good Dr's and the community approve so that I can adjust any discrepancies brought up and adjust accordingly in the first post.

I will try to condense all the information and make it an easy read without leaving out any vital references.

Dr Jim I hope to see you there with any suggestions I have no hard feelings whatsoever. I respect and value your opinion as always.

 

[IRQ_001]

I know that we needlessly got off topic, however, it's good relative info.

Ape, would you kindly confirm my last post? Perhaps we can close this and open your thread, which I look forward too, once you include your input?

 

[IRQ_001]

As far as ramping up the TP dose as TE clears to maintain a net of 750 a week I don't think it will matter that much because by that time in you cycle you will have reached the point of diminishing returns. Probably a waste of gear.

I'm not sure I understand the above... can you elaborate bro? Something is missing.

 

[MR10X]

I think what he means is after a while you will not gain any more muscle and have reached your sticking point so why waste any more money and risk greater side effects,you will lose some muscle when the steroids clear anyway so just deal with it because theres nothing you can do except stay on steroids to maintain what you have while on....

 

[ApeShitFuckJacked]

Big Mesc may be correct on diminishing returns but to say it is a waste of gear does not really make sense as per a cycle where test p is not included test e is extended out further meaning actually more mg of test are used in compared to switching to test p. Therefore it is somewhat more conservative (I realize test p is about twice as expensive on a mg to mg basis) but this is a difference of about 30 dollars which I believe is well worth being able to start pct earlier. Ultimately the decision falls on the user but there are many guys that would not label this a waste in any way

I do not have a specific study (I'm sure I could find one) but When TT levels drop below pre cycle values your body is in an environment where stimulation of FSH and LH levels is warranted in order to bring TT levels back into pre cycle range. This is just a general law of homeostasis. Positive and negative feedback loops.

I picked 400-500ng/dl because this is going to be the point at which almost all users are at or under their pre cycle levels.

I keep summarizing things down and giving practical information to apply in order to make it an easier read but I see that I should be doing the opposite perhaps?

To clarify like with most things everybody is going to have a different TT level where pct should begin. This is based on pre cycle values. A general rule of thumb 400-500ng/dl i.e. 50mg exogenous test can be applied effectively for most users. If you have pre cycle blood values then use these.

 

[ApeShitFuckJacked]

BigMesc I would not suggest starting test p when your supposed to start pct! That entirely defeats the purpose of being able to get the benefits of test e for the same length while also getting the benefits of a faster pct start from test p. It also means your t levels will be very low for a couple weeks while still being suppressed.

You start test p at the point where test e levels will be almost 0 at the end of your cycle.

It is going to be approx 29 days for 750mg test e cycle. So if you wanted to run 12 weeks you would start test p beginning of week 9.

And yes I tapered the doses upwards to avoid spike in TT levels. Remember when you start Test P you still have test e in your system and test p metabolizes much more quickly. Starting with an equivalent dose would skyrocket your levels within a week.

 

[ApeShitFuckJacked]

C'mon let's not make this so complicated it should be easy to follow for people.

8 weeks test E 4 weeks test p (you may front load or start test p first week of your cycle just like normal)

Taper you test p dose upward when you switch over.

Wait until test p levels reach 50mg after cycle ends.

Start HCG clomid nolva pct

 

[Dr JIM]

Goodness the is NOT at all about ONE individuals opinion whether it's mine or someone else's.

It's about the essence of what Ape said that's important.

Which is AI's may lower IGF.
As I indicated earlier that very sentiment has been echoed on MANY BB forums. (At least now I know there is A source for that comment)

And to be honest I've never heard this assertion previously and was bemused by it's presence on other boards.

Regardless the point of my final posts are an effort to explain the differences in the scientific literatures and to expound further upon the notion AIs effect IGF levels.

REGARDLESS because the IGF changes in ALL the studies were relatively small, I doubt AIs have a significant impact on SKM anabolism pro or con.

Regards
Jim

 

[IRQ_001]

I keep summarizing things down and giving practical information to apply in order to make it an easier read but I see that I should be doing the opposite perhaps?

Don't be an ass lol, we appreciate you. Thanks for clarifying the other points...

 

[ApeShitFuckJacked]

I agree with you when you say this is not about one persons opinion, yet you clearly began your previous post as an attack on "my opinion" when I have clearly stated that Adex lowering igf-1 levels is in fact not my opinion BEFORE you even made a single post on this thread.

If you want to express your thoughts on a study then do so but do not interject that I am suggesting a course of action based on an opinion I do not have.

It is slanderous.

All of your posts have been addressed to me when they should be addressed to the whole board and not as an attack but rather a clarification of the study.