Question about my cycle

[gx52a]

I want to seek to understand here and am not being argumentative:


When you say "potential" you are referring to an individual's FFMI at a given %BF (e.g., 12 or 15
% for those not on the body dysmophic spectrum) that is sustainable with their natural endogenous hormone levels (100% baseline - no AAS exposure)?

If so, how would you properly test this hypothesis?

The idea is to gamble (potentially negatively impact) your intact HPTA in order to reach your genetic potential faster (potential that would be attainable with intact HPTA)?

If I take AAS, I surely don't want to look my natural best faster. But that's just me. Is this a new thing? I have honestly never heard of it.

FFMI is independent of BF%. It's just a measure of musculature. You need both figures to get an idea of someone's physique.

Let's be clear, OP is trolling, nobody at 35%+ BF has any business taking AAS. But let's say you're a typical gym-goer, lifting consistently for one year -- sure, a couple cycles could make sense. Here's why:

1) Fully exhausting natty gains can easily take 10 years as you crank out those last few pounds of muscle. Some people would actually age out of their prime before that could even happen! AAS can instead slingshot you to, or slightly beyond, that point in just a couple cycles.

2) AAS produce permanent (or at least nearly permanent) adaptations in muscle tissues by stimulating satellite cells to divide. These cells are extremely long-lived, and the increase in myonuclear density means that your natty potential is actually increased. I realize this blurs the whole picture with "reaching your potential", but anyway.

3) You might conceivably view the benefits of #1 and #2 as worth the health costs of a few cycles, while a lifetime of use might not meet your risk/reward threshold.

It really depends on your goals and risk tolerance, it's not so much "a thing" rather than just a reflection that different people are motivated by different things.

I think we can at least agree that 3-4 cycles is less likely to cause permanent harm to your HPTA than BnC for a couple decades.

 

[readalot]

FFMI is independent of BF%. It's just a measure of musculature. You need both figures to get an idea of someone's physique.

Let's be clear, OP is trolling, nobody at 35%+ BF has any business taking AAS. But let's say you're a typical gym-goer, lifting consistently for one year -- sure, a couple cycles could make sense. Here's why:

1) Fully exhausting natty gains can easily take 10 years as you crank out those last few pounds of muscle. Some people would actually age out of their prime before that could even happen! AAS can instead slingshot you to, or slightly beyond, that point in just a couple cycles.

2) AAS produce permanent (or at least nearly permanent) adaptations in muscle tissues by stimulating satellite cells to divide. These cells are extremely long-lived, and the increase in myonuclear density means that your natty potential is actually increased. I realize this blurs the whole picture with "reaching your potential", but anyway.

3) You might conceivably view the benefits of #1 and #2 as worth the health costs of a few cycles, while a lifetime of use might not meet your risk/reward threshold.

It really depends on your goals and risk tolerance, it's not so much "a thing" rather than just a reflection that different people are motivated by different things.

I think we can at least agree that 3-4 cycles is less likely to cause permanent harm to your HPTA than BnC for a couple decades.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

Yes I understand FFMI is independent of BF. That is why I called them out as distinct metrics. As you know maintaining a reasonably high FFMI as BF gets lower gets harder and harder for a natural with only their HPTA to support them.

Appreciate your time. Agreed on the health argument and that OP should avoid AAS use at this time.

 

[BoloYang2023]

if this is the case he could run tren if he could handle it and get that fat gone as long as diet and training was on point, it does burn fat it also wreaks hell on your body. i know this as ive been researching it and staring at these 3 bottles of tren lol

 

[Vanargandar]

Also, on a side note:
I would really appreciate ONLY helpful comments, obviously I fucked up with not introducing myself in first place, therfor I'm sorry.

Since most of y'all are experts I'm seeking for good recommendations on how to loose body fat and get "leaner".

If you guys tell me Carderine + Stenabolic isn't a good stack or doesn't do what I'm looking for, I appreciate your answer.

To be honest I'm just afraid of needles and to actually hit the right muscles etc...

As mentioned, I'm a newbie so therefor I can't know everything yet,
I'm just confident to know how to train & what/when to eat.


Best Regards

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume you're not trolling. You will get very disappointing results, if any at all, from the initial "cycle" you posted. If your main goal is losing bodyfat, there is essentially no drug or workout regime that is going to do anything substantial for the average dude by itself. The first thing you need is a proper diet, point blank. If you can't get your diet in check, then you're going to fail miserably, regardless of how much you punish yourself with cardio or how many drugs you take. If you have the discipline to stick to a sustainable diet, then you have won 99% of the battle and will see amazing results.

Now, all that being said, something that will help you get that extra 1% to achieve your goals faster/easier will be something like Semaglutide or Tirzepatide, the latter (according to studies and anecdote) being more effective with less side-effects. This is a 1x weekly injection with a VERY SMALL insulin syringe that myself and my wife can attest feels like absolutely nothing injected subq into belly fat, and my wife is a total pussy (e.g. can't donate blood, almost faints during bloodwork). I believe @Spaceman Spiff can point you in the proper direction for a dosage/reconstitution guide.

For now stick to this and stay away from AAS. I promise you will get better results for what you desire with less hassle, less side-effects (hormonal or otherwise), and it could possibly be less expensive in the long run.