MESO-Rx Exclusive Primobolan and/or Equipoise Symptoms of Low vs. High Estrogens, Explained

[GuerillaPete]

Well that's a remarkably dumb conclusion.

If you read my article here, you'll see that one should distinguish between endocrinology & intracrinology.

If the estrone direct immunoassay is cross-reactive of anything significant, it's sulfated portions (estrone sulfate).

At the end of the day, we don't really give a fuck anyway because what matters is the local activity of estrogens that even ultrasensitive estrone values do not reflect.

Local estrone fatty acyl ester activity would start to get us somewhere. Find me a private laboratory measure for that.

But, for the sake of argument, let us assume that 100% of this estrone DIA measurement was free estrone (bioactive E1). Then, 1,352 pmol/L would (at 2% of estradiol's estrogenic potency) be as bioactive as 7.3 pg/mL of free estradiol (free E2). This is an insignificant estradiol concentration that is well within the normal male reference range, and as such, not biologically or clinically relevant.

The point of this article was, if anything, to illustrate the low value of bloodwork measures, and to provide a practical flowchart that practically dispenses with them because symptoms should dictate decisionmaking over some arbitrary value.

Believe it or not, no value is usually better than a bullshit value; and judging by the way people order up and interpret bloodwork (including "authorities" like MPMD) so badly, it's fair to say that the overwhelming bulk of bloodwork value interpretations laypeople make from self-ordered laboratory measures constitutes bullshit.

Aromatization is hard to understand completely to much variations between individuals.
The idea behind the synthetic estrogen was that both estrogen and estrone regular blood test detects high levels yet when done a sensitive test its low.
At the end of the day this things are your or his or my opinions.
Opinions based on our and others research, bloodwork and so on.

 

[Burly]

Every user reacts different to his roid cycle, not everyone has low estro sides on Primo, Mast or EQ.

 

[Type-IIx]

Aromatization is hard to understand completely to much variations between individuals.
The idea behind the synthetic estrogen was that both estrogen and estrone regular blood test detects high levels yet when done a sensitive test its low.
At the end of the day this things are your or his or my opinions.
Opinions based on our and others research, bloodwork and so on.

I suppose, I was in a cunty mood when I replied to you, can't handle Tren at only 100 mg weekly like I used to.

 

[GuerillaPete]

I suppose, I was in a cunty mood when I replied to you, can't handle Tren at only 100 mg weekly like I used to.

I feel you bro .
Used to love 19nor AAS was having no sides until it changed.
You are a good dude we all know that .

 

[mrwalters]

This was perfectly timed.
I am currently on a Test /Primo cycle
T 400/wk
P 700/wk

My estradiol test just came back yesterday at 10

I'm on my phone at lunch and dodnt get the time to focus in on all of it, but when I get back home I'll have to read through more thoroughly to see if I can find a solution to increase my E2 some.

 

[Millard]

when I get back home I'll have to read through more thoroughly to see if I can find a solution to increase my E2 some.

The decision-making flowchart at the end of the article is very useful for this.

 

[mrwalters]

I got a chance to read through the article on the home computer.
That must have taken some time to put together.

I don't have any joint issues, so according to the flowchart I'm not too low on E2.

I did see that DHEA was stated, and I am already taking that everyday, so maybe that's why I haven't experienced sides other than lethargy.

I'll attach my blood test results from 10 weeks in on Test/Primo.
The test was taken as I have been titrating up over the course of 10 weeks to get a feel for the combo.

When blood was drawn, my cycle was:
350mg T and 630 Primo/week

Do you think an Estradiol level of 10 is getting too low?

 

[Type-IIx]

Evidence of Boldenone Increasing E2

If I were to add anything to Primobolan / Equipoise Crashed my E2 – Help! - MESO-Rx

It would be to bolster the (apparently controversial) evidence that EQ tends to increase E2.

Additional Data Demonstrating Increased Estradiol by EQ
From this very thread [post], @fike shared his bloodwork showing increased E2 (114 pg/mL [Very High]), without confounding factors (e.g., trenbolone, exemestane) using the perfectly valid nonsensitive E2 (Roche ECLIA) assay: EQ (600 mg) + Var (350 - 700 mg) + Test (200 mg) :

View attachment 267385

Animal data (same CYP19A1 Aromatase gene) showing dose-dependency to the increase to E2 (and decrease to T) by EQ:
View attachment 267386

Mechanistic data from human placental microsomes demonstrating estrone and estradiol is produced by boldenone aromatization: Gual, C., Morato, T., Hayano, M., Gut, M., & Dorfman, R. I. (1962). Biosynthesis of Estrogens. Endocrinology, 71(6), 920–925. doi:10.1210/endo-71-6-920

Defense of the Validity of the Roche ECLIA (Roche Elecsys Estradiol II Immunoassay)

So, I did some research on the supposed insensitivity of the "nonsensitive" (here, Roche ECLIA) estradiol radioimmunoassay.

From Krasowski MD, Drees D, Morris CS, Maakestad J, Blau JL, Ekins S. Cross-reactivity of steroid hormone immunoassays: clinical significance and two-dimensional molecular similarity prediction. BMC Clin Pathol. 2014 Jul 14;14:33. doi: 10.1186/1472-6890-14-33. PMID: 25071417; PMCID: PMC4112981:

View attachment 267432

Methods
...
Two-dimensional (2D) Similarity analysis
Comparison of similarity of test molecules to the target compounds of the steroid immunoassays used two-dimensional (2D) similarity analysis, which determines the similarity between molecules independent of any in vitro data (52-54)... 2D similarity searching used the "find similar molecules by fingerprints" protocol in Discovery Studio versions 2.5.5 and 3.5 (Accelrys, Inc. San Diego, California, USA). MDL public keys (a specific 2D similarity algorithm) were used with the Tanimoto similarity coefficient (ranging from 0 to 1 with 1 being maximally similar and 0 being maximally dissimilar) as an input query...
...
Estradiol immunoassay
Only estrone (0.54%) produced greater than 0.5% cross-reactivity on the Roche Elecsys Estradiol II immunoasay at a challenge of 1 µg/mL (1,000 ng/mL) (
See Table 3). Estriol, estropipate, ethinyl estradiol, 2-methoxy-estradiol, 17β-estradiol-3, 17-disulfate each produced very weak cross-reactivity between 0.05 and 0.5%. The aromatase inhibitors exemestane (Aromasin), formestane, and letrozole produced no detectable cross-reactivity (supported also by Krasowski, M. D., Drees, D., Morris, C. S., Maakestad, J., Blau, J. L., & Ekins, S. (2014). Cross-reactivity of steroid hormone immunoassays: clinical significance and two-dimensional molecular similarity prediction. BMC Clinical Pathology, 14(1). doi:10.1186/1472-6890-14-33).

Using the cross-reactivity values, the apparent estradiol concentration that could be produced on the Roche Elecsys immunoassay was estimated for compounds based on published serum/plasma concentrations if available (see Table 3). No compound was predicted to produce estradiol concentrations within the reference range for males or females. Even estriol, which can reach high concentrations in pregnancy, likely produces little or no clinically significant impact on the Roche estradiol immunoassay due to low cross-reactivity. The 2D similarities of estrone (0.882), ethinyl estradiol (0.943), and estriol (0.917) were higher than any of the (103 structurally similar, see 3. Estradiol sheet in Supplementary Materials workbook) compounds that were not cross-reactive on the Roche assay. See:
Supplementary Materials (1472-6890-14-33-S1.xlsx)

My understanding is that Derek from MPMD has done a YouTube video about supposed cross-reactivity of "some unknown estrogen" produced by EQ.

My conclusion is that he's pretty unreliable and his content is nothing more than entertaining.

Worked Example (Application)

To do the math for anyone reading/caring:

The estrone (E1) result associated with the user from the Help! Primo/EQ Crashed my E2... article using EQ (800 mg) + Tren (600 mg) + Test (300 mg) in pg/mL units = 365.6 pg/mL

The degreee of cross-reactivity in @fike's "nonsensitive" E2 assay between E1 & E2 = 0.54%

0.54% * 365.6 pg/mL = 1.925 pg/mL, or 1.6% of fike's 114 pg/mL E2 result.

Further, given fike's experiencing classical estrogenic symptoms, we can rule out E1's contribution, since it is a mere 2% as potent as E2 at activating ERα, requiring 50-fold greater concentrations than that at which E2 causes these symptoms in men.

Conclusion
The argument that boldenone cannot increase estradiol is not tenable. Modern estradiol ("nonsensitive") radioimmunoassays like Roche's possess high selectivity, and can be used by someone skilled for interpretation and decisionmaking.

Since ultrasensitive/sensitive estradiol assays may be inaccessible or impracticable for a user, the Roche ECLIA is a suitable radioimmunoassay that conforms to a high degree of specificity for estradiol.

The argument that only sensitive or ultrasensitive methods can be used to draw conclusions about circulating estrogen concentrations in blood is a form of invalid argument a la the Perfect Solution Fallacy. Subjecting RIA estradiol measures to heightened scrutiny because they show elevated blood estradiol, but accepting that same assay because it shows low/normal blood estradiol, is an invalid technique called cherry-picking.

See also: Boldenone (EQ) Misconceptions and Comparison with Metenolone (Primo) [Author: Type-IIx]