Primo: risk-reward profile... is it 'conspicuous consumption' or does it really only 'shine' with long-term use?

[Deleted member 123722]

You are delusional and no; you are not listening. Your logic is a fallacy. It's based on lacking information. And even if we disregard all the physiological consequences, of which knowledge you are lacking, you are not listening; your are high on drugs. If you can't see/feel that, then you are not as enlightened as you made yourself to be in the ketamine discussion.

Bodybuilding is a slow process. It's not going to end after a next blast. There is still going to be that and this that you'll want to achieve and this never really ends. So you need to make it sustainable. Now you are just weak, you don't want the feeling of being on to go away. It's a scary process, I know, but you sound like a self absorbed drug addict. Rationalizing to him self why he should continue using the drugs. As I said, and you didn't listen, your mind is on drugs, you need to get to physiological levels in order to feel, think, reason, etc. as a SOBER person.

You know, do what you want. But for everybody else reading this; no, being constantly on cycle is not healthy, and here you can witness a classical drug addict behaviour. Not every drug addict is on the street putting needles in his arms. There are various levels of addiction, one of them being functional addict. Aas have a broad effect on your mental state, for some it's more pronounced and for others it's less, but they effect us all profoundly. Namely impulsivity and an unstable personality disorder, which you can see here for yourself.

No matter how you put it, aas are trash drugs, and you can not make them safe or healthy. Cycling all the time, just leads to all sorts of neurobiological chit. So don't cycle all the time. Simple. But if you do, then at least be cognisant of your changed behaviour and personality.

First of all, I don't even FEEL like I'm on anything, so that argument is out the window; it's not like I feel like superman and I can't get off because I'm running around high on life, and if I stop, I'll drop into a steep depression. Some people get that feeling; I don't.

Secondly, again, you're not listening to my point: If I did what you said, and go to true TRT, but my intentions are to blast later on, WHAT IS THE POINT? This is like a smoker taking a break from cigarettes every two months in-between blasting packs per day for months. The only way to stop harming his body with smoking is to quit completely; his attempts to restore his lungs to normal every so often are futile. Of course, this is better than someone smoking packs per day nonstop for decades, but I'm not doing that.

And as you said yourself, bodybuilding is a slow process, and it take YEARS to get to where you want. And if you want to achieve a look that is not possible naturally, you will be cycling on and off for years. No matter how we do it, it's either going to be extremely harmful (abusive dosages with the harshest gear) or we can do it smarter, with the least harmful drugs and lower dosages. But the idea that a month or two off between cycles is going to save our lives is asinine. The only way to save your life from this is to stop completely... and no one here is stopping completely. Where I stopped now for two months, or January for two months, what is the difference? Can anyone tell me the difference, or you just all going to repeat the same thing.

Many of you guy acting like I'm Bostin Lloyd lol...that guy was fucking addicted, and he was abusing all sorts of crazy shit, just to be on. I could stop right now and do nothing no problem, but I'd still have to be on TRT for life. But I have a goal in mind and it's going to take until next summer to achieve; I'm not there yet.

I've lowered my dose to 400mg of Test, and I'll be on that until my next cycle that I'll start in Oct and end Jan...Then after that cycle, I'll take another break, then begin a cutting phase probably in March. So tell me, what difference would it make if I went to 150 a week in between those cycles? How many years of my life do I "save"; and how do you know I'm losing years of my life or damaging my organs? Every time I go get blood work it comes back perfect after a cycle; shit my test/primo cycle as nearly perfect.
I don't even get elevated blood pressure from any cycle I've been on, which is the REAL killer causing CVD

"PB isn't the whole story." Ok.

"Bloods don't show the whole story." Ok.

"EKG doesn't show the whole story." Ok.

The only thing I haven't done is heart image... and I can bet my life that it isn't enlarged or irregular.

So basically nothing can show the whole story and everyone of us should stop taking steroids right now; no amount of gear is justified to take, not even a "sports TRT"... No one should blast again, either.

I'm not convinced by these arguments; they are weak and based on fear rather than sound logic. And yes, if something isn't sound logically, why would you follow it?

The only person who realize the flaw in this "get off totally" argument was was @HB_22

 

[Jin23]

No sense in debating this further. Sincerely, wish you good luck.

 

[Rido]

No sense in debating this further. Sincerely, wish you good luck.

Yea. Sometimes I'm about to respond but it's pointless. It's like arguing with someone with an IQ of 70 with limited understanding who knows the word logical. Can't think logically if you dont have a strong base.

 

[Deleted member 123722]

No sense in debating this further. Sincerely, wish you good luck.

That's what I thought.

Yea. Sometimes I'm about to respond but it's pointless. It's like arguing with someone with an IQ of 70 with limited understanding who knows the word logical. Can't think logically if you dont have a strong base.

Except I don't have an IQ of 70, and you both know it. Again, my smoker analogy is extremely sound analogy. Tell me how a smoker taking breaks occasionally for a mere 6-8 weeks on "TRT smoking" is going to save his life and organs?

Everyone has advice but can't actually justify their advice, because it simply doesn't make sense until you're done reaching your goals. There is a price to pay to get there , and once you do, then you can find out whatever gear you need to stay there as safe as possible. Unfortunately, some people have shitty genetics where they get fucked up doing almost nothing; others can abuse steroids for decades nonstop and walk away without an issue.

You two can give your opinions, but your opinions are not facts. I appreciate your concern for me and others who in your view are "addicted" or "abusing gear," but you both need to learn how to actually convince a person as to why going to TRT for 6-8 weeks is going to be life-changing.

If you were advising that people should only blast once a year, then sure, you'd have an argument, because now you have 9 months off on TRT with only a blast of three months; over time, that adds up to years of extend life and less "harm" to organs or whatever, even if they took harsh shit. And those who only take a cycle are year, no doubt are doing less "damage" or "harm" that someone who runs multiple cycles a year.

But from what I've learned and researched, the real killer of bodybuilders is not even the steroids, it's the bulking up quickly and dieting down quickly for shows; the use of diuretics, the abuse of HIGH DOSAGES of gear for DECADES, PLUS being heavy, in of itself, which is hard on the heart.

 

[Rido]

That's what I thought.

Except I don't have an IQ of 70, and you both know it. Again, my smoker analogy is extremely sound analogy. Tell me how a smoker taking breaks occasionally for a mere 6-8 weeks on "TRT smoking" is going to save his life and organs?

Everyone has advice but can't actually justify their advice, because it simply doesn't make sense until you're done reaching your goals. There is a price to pay to get there , and once you do, then you can find out whatever gear you need to stay there as safe as possible. Unfortunately, some people have shitty genetics where they get fucked up doing almost nothing; others can abuse steroids for decades nonstop and walk away without an issue.

You two can give your opinions, but your opinions are not facts. I appreciate your concern for me and others who in your view are "addicted" or "abusing gear," but you both need to learn how to actually convince a person as to why going to TRT for 6-8 weeks is going to be life-changing.

If you were advising that people should only blast once a year, then sure, you'd have an argument, because now you have 9 months off on TRT with only a blast of three months; over time, that adds up to years of extend life and less "harm" to organs or whatever, even if they took harsh shit. And those who only take a cycle are year, no doubt are doing less "damage" or "harm" that someone who runs multiple cycles a year.

But from what I've learned and researched, the real killer of bodybuilders is not even the steroids, it's the bulking up quickly and dieting down quickly for shows; the use of diuretics, the abuse of HIGH DOSAGES of gear for DECADES, PLUS being heavy, in of itself, which is hard on the heart.

Lol. You we are all abusing gear just some of us are smarter about it.

Since you like making threads so much
Why don't you make a thread about what people think of your permablast, list all compounds and dates.

In the end, do what you want bro. Keep making yourself feel better.

I'm sure 99 percent of the harm reduction coaches would laugh at your decision/"logic"

 

[Deleted member 123722]

Lol. You we are all abusing gear just some of us are smarter about it.

Since you like making threads so much
Why don't you make a thread about what people think of your permablast, list all compounds and dates.

In the end, do what you want bro. Keep making yourself feel better.

I'm sure 99 percent of the harm reduction coaches would laugh at your decision/"logic"

My god man, don't you see my point or not...?

I'm not trying to make myself feel any better lol. If these arguments were convincing, I would listen because I would have no fucking choice.

Most people do this:

16-20 week cycle for bulk, followed by a 6-8 week cruise. Then they'll do 16-20 weeks contest prep or cutting cycle; then 6-8 cruise: that's essentially the whole damn year.

During those "cruises," depending on what they were taking, the gear is still in the background, so they aren't really off anyway. And some people "cruise" on different shit, whether its 500mg, "sports" TRT, or true TRT at 150 or whatever.

Smoker analogy: Smoking two packs a day for 20 weeks; drops down to 10 cigs a day for 6-8 weeks. Repeats. Tell me how those 12-16 weeks total off is going really save his lungs or whatever? Now, I agree it's probably way better to not smoke two packs indefinitely, but you're kidding yourself if you think a few weeks off and this dude isn't going to get lung cancer. Then again, he may not, if his genetics are great.

I was on 1,150 grams of gear, along with 10iu GH, clen, t3 and anavar; I dropped the, GH, clen, and t3, then lowered it to 800mg of just test/primo; now I'm gonna do 400mg of cyp only, and I'm still going to die? Even if I went to 200mg, someone would complain it's not low enough. You even said I could stay 200 cyp and 200 primo in my other thread, so what's wrong with 400 test? You're not even congruent with your own argument.

The issue here what is the definition of "cruise" to someone: If 600 test shown in studies to be totally fine, Milos explaining he's been on 500mg for 30 fucking years, what is the problem?

What's even DUMBER than blast/cruise, is someone taking a cycle, then going on PCT to restore natural HTPA and all that, then shut it down right after...This would only make sense if they wanted to run ONE cycle, get to max natural potential gains as fast as possible, then try to maintain that for life...but who actually does that?

One will argue ,"but that's to maintain fertility." Again, how stupid is it to go fertile, then unfertile on and off...? Moreover, even fertility is genetic.

So again, what is the logic for someone to take 6-8 week breaks in between 16-20 cycles. Perhaps its to make the user FEEL better than they are "coming off" but they really aren't; the only time you're really off, is when you're fucking DONE with gear, just like if a smoker QUITS.

If anything, you're trying to extend the time using gear as long as possible, like someone trying to take GH 5 on 2 off so they can afford it.

But what if someone pushes hard for a year straight, then takes an entire year off?

What if Person A pushes two grams of gear for a year straight and takes off a year straight? Are they worse off than someone who only blasts for six months straight?

What is the real factor hear; total time off or taking breaks within the year?

I'm questioning the time off, not even for myself, but for arguments sake. Again, I can't easily go to 200mgs for the next 6-8 weeks, but I'm going to blast again in Oct, as planned.

 

[AlphaEdge]

Actually I appreciate the honesty here.

In the end it's your life, make your own decisions and own it.

I can see why the PCT argument is dumb af especially if you jump on another cycle right after restoring your HTPA

The only reason why everyone is hung up is because they believe so strongly in harm reduction, when in fact majority of it is just based on bro science and assumptions and regurgitating what someone else said.

I believe the only logical reason why we don't run long term blasts is because we don't actually have a lot of data/clinical studies supporting long term cycles.

Fear of the unknown I suppose.

My only request is that I implore you - whatever the outcome is, to assist the community by logging and posting your experience. Your data point will be invaluable to future generations of AAS users.

Ignore all the salty cucks trying to tell you what to do with your life. I strongly believe that people will do whatever they want to do and that is fine as long as they own it and don't whine about the consequences.

I wish you good luck, may the gains always be flowing.

 

[Jin23]

lawl. This delusional fucks seem to create their own gravity field, where more of the same, seem to be drawn in to the hole.

 

[Deleted member 123722]

lawl. This delusional fucks seem to create their own gravity field, where more of the same, seem to be drawn in to the hole.

See, now you're just being disrespectful and emotional about it. Why can't you just put your ego and bias aside, and simply dismantle the arguments? If you can do that, you not only can "save" me, but anyone else who may think like I am right now.

There are people who NEVER come off, and go solely off blood work...did you know that? They'll stay on as long as their blood work allows, so long as they are in "acceptable" ranges—which doesn't mean healthy, but not too unhealthy. I'm not suggesting that of course.

I've done cycles on and off, like I was told for years; this is the only year I've basically keep going, with a month in between cycles.

It seems to me the only argument you could make is that blasting and cruising will delay the negative affects in the long run, allowing someone to take steroids for years longer. But again, what if someone blasted for a few years straight, got to their goal, then stopped completely? Will these two individual experience the same "damage" despite their approaches? It would be impossible to know because of the uniqueness of each individual due to their genetic make up. We have smokers who live to 100, and people who live healthy lives die of cancer at 65.

If the short breaks in between cycles are meant to give the body a break, repair and all that, then what you're really saying is, what matters is total time off... And if that is the case, then a user can design how they want to use the drugs, including how they want to get off them.

Again, just to illiterate, what I'm questioning in the "time off" itself; like @HB_22 said, he believes it allows the heart to sort of heal itself and give organs a break, but that doesn't prevent further damage or whatever from future use. The only thing that could, is complete cessation of steroids indefinitely, thus rendering these utterly pointless. In fact, I could argue it is as delusional as my smoking analogy.

What does make more sense, is trying to minimize the time on gear in total, but this can be divided in however way one wanted to, if it is the case, that total time on is what really matter.

 

[Jin23]

Actually now I'm just trolling ...

 

[Rido]

See, now you're just being disrespectful and emotional about it. Why can't you just put your ego and bias aside, and simply dismantle the arguments? If you can do that, you not only can "save" me, but anyone else who may think like I am right now.

There are people who NEVER come off, and go solely off blood work...did you know that? They'll stay on as long as their blood work allows, so long as they are in "acceptable" ranges—which doesn't mean healthy, but not too unhealthy. I'm not suggesting that of course.

I've done cycles on and off, like I was told for years; this is the only year I've basically keep going, with a month in between cycles.

It seems to me the only argument you could make is that blasting and cruising will delay the negative affects in the long run, allowing someone to take steroids for years longer. But again, what if someone blasted for a few years straight, got to their goal, then stopped completely? Will these two individual experience the same "damage" despite their approaches? It would be impossible to know because of the uniqueness of each individual due to their genetic make up. We have smokers who live to 100, and people who live healthy lives die of cancer at 65.

If the short breaks in between cycles are meant to give the body a break, repair and all that, then what you're really saying is, what matters is total time off... And if that is the case, then a user can design how they want to use the drugs, including how they want to get off them.

Again, just to illiterate, what I'm questioning in the "time off" itself; like @HB_22 said, he believes it allows the heart to sort of heal itself and give organs a break, but that doesn't prevent further damage or whatever from future use. The only thing that could, is complete cessation of steroids indefinitely, thus rendering these utterly pointless. In fact, I could argue it is as delusional as my smoking analogy.

What does make more sense, is trying to minimize the time on gear in total, but this can be divided in however way one wanted to, if it is the case, that total time on is what really matter.

Kewl

 

[HB_22]

I think everyone just should take a couple deep breaths and just relax. But seriously sometimes people have different opinions, just let it be and move on.

 

[Deleted member 123722]

I am completely relaxed... I'm just trying to understand the logic behind their arguments, and they fail to provide them, which I find strange.

I'll give you all an example of how my stupid "logic" and how it does apply here.

When I spoke to John Meadow (RIP) when covid just started, he told me he would never run Tren A more than 8-12 weeks. Now, I and many others, highly respect John; I could have taken his advice, but I decided to see for myself.

I figured that since most people will run Tren A anywhere from 300-500mg a week for that 8-12 weeks; logically (since you guys hate that word now lol) I should be able to run Tren E at 200mg for twice the amount of time, at half the dose of what others would run. That's when I did my 200cyp/200 Tren E transformation over six months. I took a month off and my blood work came back flawless.

Now that's John Meadows, one of the most loved and highly respected people in this industry, yet he probably would have told me not to do it. I followed my intuition and reason, and I was right. I experienced literally no sides at that dose, and it helped me transform my body from a fat whale to a decent form. But literally everyone will say NEVER RUN TREN AT THIS ARBITRARILY LENGTH OF TIME BECAUSE IT WILL KILL AND YOUR WHOLE FAMILY.

So people here will shit on me for being "impulsive" and running experiments, flip-flopping and trying everything, but that's the fucking point of experimentation: to actually KNOW what will affect you or not, instead of listening to random strangers on a board, who can't even defend their own arguments when challenged or refute what they claim are bad ones.

I would love to be convinced; I have no problem admitting being wrong, transparent, or even embarrassed; all I care about is the TRUTH, what works, and what makes sense.

 

[Rido]

You are far past convincing. You are so limited to blood work and can't think past that. It's like talking to a wall. You do not have the base medical knowledge over health monitoring to even continue this conversation

My responses are having less substance now because I feel like talking to you is more of a waste of time. From my perspective, you have no "logical point".

You need a strong medical knowledge base to make a "logical" health decision. Which you don't.

 

[Deleted member 123722]

You are far past convincing. You are so limited to blood work and can't think past that. It's like talking to a wall. You do not have the base medical knowledge over health monitoring to even continue this conversation

So then, teach me what I'm missing so badly?

Bloodwork is not the end all be all, yet everyone uses that to determine when to come on and off; literally, that's what everyone monitors. As far as neurotoxicity and all that, how does one monitor that? Heart health: you say EKG and also the heart imaging... what else? Same with kidneys? How many tests do we need to know if we are getting destroyed by an invisible hand when taking this stuff?

So instead of telling me how ignorant or stupid I am, why not educate me and everyone else on here what you and a few others seem to know?

And AGAIN, even if I listen to you and take the 200mg cyp and 200mg primo (which you recommended on my semi-log) how do those 6-8 weeks help? That's the real question here. Shit. I'll even drop down to 200 cyp only, I don't give a shit lol. I'm running a new volume program that doesn't even require going to failure, so I don't even need to go hard until my next blast begins.

But you need to answer the basic question...I've been asking this entire time that neither you nor Jin seem to be able to answer.

 

[Rido]

So then, teach me what I'm missing so badly?

Bloodwork is not the end all be all, yet everyone uses that to determine when to come on and off; literally, that's what everyone monitors. As far as neurotoxicity and all that, how does one monitor that? Heart health: you say EKG and also the heart imaging... what else? Same with kidneys? How many tests do we need to know if we are getting destroyed by an invisible hand when taking this stuff?

So instead of telling me how ignorant or stupid I am, why not educate me and everyone else on here what you and a few others seem to know?

And AGAIN, even if I listen to you and take the 200mg cyp and 200mg primo (which you recommended on my semi-log) how do those 6-8 weeks help? That's the real question here. Shit. I'll even drop down to 200 cyp only, I don't give a shit lol. I'm running a new volume program that doesn't even require going to failure, so I don't even need to go hard until my next blast begins.

But you need to answer the basic question...I've been asking this entire time that neither you nor Jin seem to be able to answer.

No dude, you aleady have it all planned out.
Go measure your neurologic health markers


Keep permablasting. Or go sign up for Victor black and read up his info about brain health or pay for a consultation.

You clearly know enough.

 

[Zmn71]

So then, teach me what I'm missing so badly?

Bloodwork is not the end all be all, yet everyone uses that to determine when to come on and off; literally, that's what everyone monitors. As far as neurotoxicity and all that, how does one monitor that? Heart health: you say EKG and also the heart imaging... what else? Same with kidneys? How many tests do we need to know if we are getting destroyed by an invisible hand when taking this stuff?

So instead of telling me how ignorant or stupid I am, why not educate me and everyone else on here what you and a few others seem to know?

And AGAIN, even if I listen to you and take the 200mg cyp and 200mg primo (which you recommended on my semi-log) how do those 6-8 weeks help? That's the real question here. Shit. I'll even drop down to 200 cyp only, I don't give a shit lol. I'm running a new volume program that doesn't even require going to failure, so I don't even need to go hard until my next blast begins.

But you need to answer the basic question...I've been asking this entire time that neither you nor Jin seem to be able to answer.

Bro just permablast and shut the fuck up. Jesus Christ quit looking for a justification. If it takes years off your life then we have one less annoying poster.

 

[Deleted member 123722]

No dude, you aleady have it all planned out.
Go measure your neurologic health markers


Keep permablasting. Or go sign up for Victor black and read up his info about brain health or pay for a consultation.

You clearly know enough.

I don't know enough, which is why I'm asking questions, but I get deflections. So I'll just stop here.

Bro just permablast and shut the fuck up. Jesus Christ quit looking for a justification. If it takes years off your life then we have one less annoying poster.

Clearly you couldn't control your vagina and had to post how annoyed you are... I don't give a shit what you think or how you feel lol. Block or ignore me.

But yea, this conversation is over, not going to waste my time trying to learn from harm reduction people, who can't even explain why their methods or philosophy actually reduce harm lol.

 

[Type-IIx]

Ack, this thread went off the rails completely.

I'd just like to use this opportunity to point out the absurdity of guiding blasts by normalization of bloodwork values:

If you look at the HAARLEM trial data, it showed that 16 weeks x 904 mg testosterone equivalent induced cardiac morphological changes (e.g., left ventricle mass ↑ by 28.3 g) and diastolic function (e.g., E/A-ratio by T₁ declined -0.45), that were reversed by the following year post-cycle (by month 9 of complete cessation, i.e. by the following year's cycle start date).

Combined rhGH use contributed to significantly higher left ventricular end-diastolic volume 3D & left ventricular end-systolic volume 3D (mL). Perhaps interesting to some, number of AAS (reflecting synergy between compounds, permitting dose reduction) were associated with lower left ventricular end-diastolic volume 3D & left ventricular end-systolic volume 3D.

This argues for a time off = 2 - 3x time on (or one 12 - 16 week cycle yearly) if you actually want to reduce harm to base-line levels. Otherwise, you're essentially allowing these changes to accrue steadily.

Normalization of blood-work values is utterly meaningless bro-science to justify resuming a blast, given the physical changes that occur, not least of all (and not confined to), to the heart.

Of course, I recognize that few will be persuaded to come off completely or follow any of this for their health (except some of the older TRT guys) without something more scary than nerd shit and an increased risk of death by "the silent killer."

I do suggest, however, looking at recent entries to the training log of Mac11wildcat - where you can observe that IFBB pros do indeed ratchet down their AAS use more substantially than most will believe (and even come off completely). If he can do it, you can do it (otherwise you're probably rationalizing your drug abuse).

 

[Deleted member 123722]

Ack, this thread went off the rails completely.

I'd just like to use this opportunity to point out the absurdity of guiding blasts by normalization of bloodwork values:

If you look at the HAARLEM trial data, it showed that 16 weeks x 904 mg testosterone equivalent induced cardiac morphological changes (e.g., left ventricle mass ↑ by 28.3 g) and diastolic function (e.g., E/A-ratio by T₁ declined -0.45), that were reversed by the following year post-cycle (by month 9 of complete cessation, i.e. by the following year's cycle start date).

Combined rhGH use contributed to significantly higher left ventricular end-diastolic volume 3D & left ventricular end-systolic volume 3D (mL). Perhaps interesting to some, number of AAS (reflecting synergy between compounds, permitting dose reduction) were associated with lower left ventricular end-diastolic volume 3D & left ventricular end-systolic volume 3D.

This argues for a time off = 2 - 3x time on (or one 12 - 16 week cycle yearly) if you actually want to reduce harm to base-line levels. Otherwise, you're essentially allowing these changes to accrue steadily.

Normalization of blood-work values is utterly meaningless bro-science to justify resuming a blast, given the physical changes that occur, not least of all (and not confined to), to the heart.

Of course, I recognize that few will be persuaded to come off completely or follow any of this for their health (except some of the older TRT guys) without something more scary than nerd shit and an increased risk of death by "the silent killer."

I do suggest, however, looking at recent entries to the training log of Mac11wildcat - where you can observe that IFBB pros do indeed ratchet down their AAS use more substantially than most will believe (and even come off completely). If he can do it, you can do it (otherwise you're probably rationalizing your drug abuse).

So essentially, if you're not a competitor, ONE blast per year to gain size, then maintain that size with TRT (if possible), and not doing any diet/cutting cycles on any gear, other than using clen or something with GH perhaps to retain as much size while in a deficit.

See the competitor has two 16-20 week cycles at least, and they are doing it for money (hopefully) to justify putting their health on the line for the long-term.

Thanks for your input.