Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

A comprehensive look at modern AAS cycling.

Andy13

Elite Mentor
Platinum
If you are planning a 10 week cycle, the goal is to be at highest blood concentrations for as many of the 10 weeks as possible.

If you use a long ester such as deca at xmg/week, it will take you 4-5 weeks to build up to max blood concentrations possible for xmg/week. So half of your cycle is not wasted, but you are not maximizing efficiency.

When coming off a cycle, the waiting period before clomid therapy begins will vary depending on the type and dose of the AAS. If you ran 500mg/week of deca for 10 weeks, a month after your last shot, you will still have around 200mg of esterified deca in your system. This is more than enough to prevent recovery. This is the reason why recovery is more difficult with a deca (or another long acting ester).

Let's calculate the amount accumulated in the body after 6 weeks of 500mg/deca. Let's say you inject it once a week and we'll give it a 1.5 week half life. Note that injection frequency makes a huge difference in blood concentration stability but no difference in amount of esterified in the system

E (greek letter "sigma") 500*e^(ln(1/2)n/1.5) from n=0 to n=6. So after 6 weeks, about 1300mg of esterified nandrolone remain in the body.

Now lets see how long, after the initial injection, it takes to reduce to a small enough amount that permits recovery.

1300*e^(ln(1/2)n/1.5) After 3 weeks, 325 mg of esterified remain

after 6 weeks, 81 mg of esterified remain.

After 8 weeks, 32mg of esterified remain.


Most guys go with "time on=time off." This will not work with long esters as I have demonstrated above. For at least a month after your last shot you are in what I call a "time in-effiency" period where you are no longer reaping the benefits of you AAS but you are not recovering either. The goal of the modern cycle is to minimize this wasted time.

The key components are:
1) Front end loading this cuts down on wasted time in the beginning of your cycle waiting for the doses to reach full theraputic levels. This concept has been used before but (as far as I know) I was the first one to quantify it mathmatically. Zyg has taken the math one step further with a graph showing, visually, the importance. Graph of eq loading

The use of orals in the beginning of a cycle is a popular component of a cycle. While I don't feel it is a nessecity, it too is a (different) type of front end load. For the advnaced BBer, dbol should be taken in the beginning of a cycle as well as loading the injectables since the anabolic response from dbol is alleged to be by a different mechanism than most injectables. If one had to chose between a dbol load and and injectable load, in most cases, the injectable load should be prefered over the dbol load.

2) Injection frequency This is crucial to obtaining even blood concentrations of androgens. Ideally, the more often injected, the better. An acceptable rule of thumb is "inject at half of the half life." For instance, if the half life of a steroid is 7 days, this should be injected at least twice weekly. For cycles that involve multiple injectables, the injections should be fractioned out and divided up based on the injectable with the shortest half life. For instance, if you were doing a test propionate and deca cycle, the old school way to do it would be to inject the prop EOD and the deca once a week. Both compounds should not be viewed as separate, but together with total androgen concentration taken into consideration. If you injected the deca only once a week, probably along with one of the propionate injections, that day will have a much larger spike on total blood androgen concentrations. Instead, the deca should be split up and taken with the propionate injections, EOD. This way there is no one day of the week that has a "spike" and even blood concentrations are maintained throughout the week.

3) Ending the cycle Switching to shorter esters toward the end of a cycle makes perfect sence however not too many guys incorporate this practice- perhaps because of the lack of variety of drugs. The modern cycle should include replacing long ester injectables with shorter ones so that recovery time is made more efficient. The necesity of switching to shorter esters toward the end of a cycle depends on the type of drugs used. Longer esters such as deca and eq should be replaced with shorter acting versions of these compounds no later than four weeks before the end of a cycle. Medium length esters such as t-enanthate and cypionate should be replaced no later than three weeks before the end of a cycle. A couple examples of appropriate replacements are: trenbolone acetate and testosterone propionate. There is no need to "load" these compounds in the middle of a cycle since 1) they are already "fast acting" and 2) blood androgen concentrations are already high.

4) Recovery With the replacement of the faster acting injectables toward the end of a cycle, the "wasted" time between the end of a cycle and beginning of clomid therapy is reduced. For instance, if 100mg TA is used ED, clomid therapy may begin in as little as 5 days after the last shot. This tremendously impoves time efficiency. Clomid therapy usually last for four weeks. An excellent thread posted by The Iron Game describes this in further detail Clomid FAQ's .

When the above recomendations are made, your cycle itself is made much more efficient and if recovery time is made more efficient as well, time "off" AAS may very well be reduced so that the overall efficiency of AAS use over time is tremendously improved.


Andy
 
Last edited:
"3) Ending the cycle Switching to shorter esters toward the end of a cycle makes perfect sence however not too many guys incorporate this practice- perhaps because of the lack of variety of drugs. The modern cycle should include replacing long ester injectables with shorter ones so that recovery time is made more efficient. The necesity of switching to shorter esters toward the end of a cycle depends on the type of drugs used. Longer esters such as deca and eq should be replaced with shorter acting versions of these compounds no later than four weeks before the end of a cycle. Medium length esters such as t-enanthate and cypionate should be replaced no later than three weeks before the end of a cycle. A couple examples of appropriate replacements are: trenbolone acetate and testosterone propionate. There is no need to "load" these compounds in the middle of a cycle since 1) they are already "fast acting" and 2) blood androgen concentrations are already high. "

i totally agree, ive been advising that to all who choose to use sustanon, however some guyz still choose to taper their cycles, taper is useless and counterproductive. STOP UTILIZING IT
 
very well written......

even a newbie like me could understand....thanks bro.
 
hamper19 said:
Can you front load using Fina?

I see no reason to as it is a fast acting compound and you should start to see the gains within a week.
Andy, Great post my friend

M18
 
Can you front load using Fina?
Front loading is really only beneficial for the long lasting esters, fina is not one of them. WHile it may offer some benefits, its not really needed.


Andy, great post my man!. I will basically be applying all of these principles in my next cycle and many thought I was goofy for stopping eq/enth 2 weeks prior to ending fina. Just to sum up my next cycle, which I think outlines Andy's post well, here it is.

week 1-2, EQ 1200mg (200 each day mon-sat)
week 1-2, Test Enth 1200mg (200 each day mon-sat)
week 3-8, EQ and Enth, 200mg mon/wed/fri
week 3-10 fina 75mg/ed and winny 50mg/ed

Clomid 4 days after last fina poke. Fina and EQ/Enth levels should all peter out about the same time so I can jump heavy into clomid therapy. The EQ and Enth have similar half lives so the EQ chart I did should also closely represent the blood levels for the Enth.

edit here -> forgot to mention I plan on taking .5mg liquidex throughout, so I should keep bloat low if not nonexistant.
 
Last edited:
Zyglamail said:
Front loading is really only beneficial for the long lasting esters, fina is not one of them. WHile it may offer some benefits, its not really needed.


Andy, great post my man!. I will basically be applying all of these principles in my next cycle and many thought I was goofy for stopping eq/enth 2 weeks prior to ending fina. Just to sum up my next cycle, which I think outlines Andy's post well, here it is.

week 1-2, EQ 1200mg (200 each day mon-sat)
week 1-2, Test Enth 1200mg (200 each day mon-sat)
week 3-8, EQ and Enth, 200mg mon/wed/fri
week 3-10 fina 75mg/ed and winny 50mg/ed

Clomid 4 days after last fina poke. Fina and EQ/Enth levels should all peter out about the same time so I can jump heavy into clomid therapy. The EQ and Enth have similar half lives so the EQ chart I did should also closely represent the blood levels for the Enth.

Awesome cycle buddy! Looking foward to updates

M18
 
As I get more time I will try and toss together some more visualization to further illustrate Andy's fine post. For now though, here is a little teaser which is directly aimed at injection frequency. I think we can all agree that the more consistant we can keep blood levels, the better results we will have with a given amount of AAS.

The following table represents 2 cycles. Both use 400mg of deca a week. One uses a single 400mg inj and the other uses 2x 200mg injections spaced 3 days apart and the numbers were calculated with a 10 day half life.

deca%20freq.jpg


A little note for those of you that are considering front loading, but afraid of the 2x or 3x dose. Note, that even though 400mg was injected at once in the above chart, there is very little released(ie unesterfied) deca in the blood. I will post more charts as time permits showing some different front load examples.
 
Last edited:
Yes I agree with you guys on saying that switching to shorter acting esters is better. I have a 10 week test and Eq cycle planned, I was going to front load the testex(2000mg) and Eq(1200mg) on the first week. So should I do the 10 weeks and then switch to prop+fina for 3 weeks then start the clomid? Or Is this to long to be on? Maybe do something like 100mg virormone prop ed with 75mg fina ed for three weeks.
 
AnabolicAgent said:
Yes I agree with you guys on saying that switching to shorter acting esters is better. I have a 10 week test and Eq cycle planned, I was going to front load the testex(2000mg) and Eq(1200mg) on the first week. So should I do the 10 weeks and then switch to prop+fina for 3 weeks then start the clomid? Or Is this to long to be on? Maybe do something like 100mg virormone prop ed with 75mg fina ed for three weeks.

I would cut the eq 4 weeks out.. Your cycle length is up to you.
 
Bump for the great post, but it has me worried. i had my whole cycle planned out but now im not sure what to do. im not worried about anything other than deca. I also dont like the idea of a big dose right away. But i think i will try it. So, if i follow this method, i should do double my amount of deca (400mg) to start out, then keep the numbers steady (200-300mg)? Any help would be appreciated.
 
great post, thanks. whats about anavar? kicks in normally about
after 3 weeks as i know. any advantage to frontload anavar?
for ex: 8 weeks cycle:
week1: 80mg/day
week2: 60mg/day
week3-8: 40mg/day
 
Great post.
I agree with the ideal of taking a longer acting ester along with the short ester.
My plan is to mix 15ml tren 75mgs/ml with 5ml test enethate or deconate 250mgs/ml. This would allow a mixture of 56mg tren & 62mgs test per ml. Of course front loading of the test would be required.

It would be great if GAC or TTokkyo would make mixtures like this.
 
It would seem logical to me that when front loading with long esters at the beginning of the cycle that Prop or Suspension be used in conjunction until the steroids with the long esters start their work. Then cut the Prop, Suspension, or Fina until the end part of the cycle.

Just seems to me that steroids that work fast die fast should be at both ends IMHO.

Any thoughts on this Zyglamail, Andy, & Serge?
 
In essence the front load gets blood levels up asap, so much so if done right that adding a short ester product in the front isnt needed. It would be more realistic to do if you were not front loading IMHO.
 
Zyglamail said:
In essence the front load gets blood levels up asap, so much so if done right that adding a short ester product in the front isnt needed. It would be more realistic to do if you were not front loading IMHO.

He's right. The use of a shorter ester in the beginnig of a cycle along with the longer one until it reaches full theraputic level is essentially the same as front loading..

But, that same result can be achieved by just loading the long ester.. You can save the shorter ester for the end.

Andy
 
Last edited:
robby said:
great post, thanks. whats about anavar? kicks in normally about
after 3 weeks as i know. any advantage to frontload anavar?
for ex: 8 weeks cycle:
week1: 80mg/day
week2: 60mg/day
week3-8: 40mg/day

Well, there is a difference between "max blood concnetration" and the actual "feel" that you get as a result of the AAS. The front load idea is based on the theory that the higher the initial blood concetrations, the quicker the "feel." This is apparently true.

But you have to realize that the actual action of the AAS on the cell (expression of the genes transcribed by AAS/receptor complex) may take some time to "accumulate."

This means that the AAS causes a lot of phones to ring in the cell. When the cell answers all of these phones and procedes with the instuctions given to it, that is when you get the "feel."

Andy
 
Great post Andy. I just spent some time last night reworking my cycle based on this and other similar info. The hotlinks to specific threads was a big plus.

Lets keep this at the top.

Oh and without divulging too much info, who are you and how do you have this knowledge?


##spiderbaby##
 
ANDY13....solid info bro.... i plan on using this theory in all of my cycles from now on.... this one gets a BIG FRONTLOAD BUMP!!!
 
Ok gang, as promised here is some art for you. The following table represents blood levels of unesterfied deca. This data was calculated using a 10 day half life.

One line represents the standard 10 week, 400mg per week sinngle weekly injection of 400mg. Another line represents a two week front load of 800 per week followed by 6 more weeks at 400mg. All doses administered 1 time per week. And lastly we have a 1 week front load with 1200mg, followed by 7 more weeks at 400mg, all inj taken 1 time per week.

Now, as you can see, all three methods peak at roughly the same highest unesterfied blood level, the main difference is in just how fast that blood level gets to that highest point. For all the people worried about overdoing it because of the large dose, remember that just because you have 1200mg delivered in a short time (1 inj in this case) does not mean it will all hydrolize (ie de-ester) and become usable at once. You will notice that even at 1200mg single injection blood levels still are realativly low until subsequent injections are taken in the following weeks.

deca-front-single.jpg


Also keep in mind front loading does not mean more overall AAS it just means more on the front end. All cycles in the chart above used 4000mg. The standard 400 no load went ten weeks and the other two went 8 weeks but used the same amount of gear.

As I get more time, I will chart the benefits of front loading in conjuction with multiple inj.
 
Zyg-- you are the shit!!!!

That graph says it all!!!

You could also do one for recovery.. This graph would just represent the amount of esterified in the system..

Guys would see that 500mg/week of deca, after 6 weeks would accumulate about 1300mg of esterified in the system (BTW guys, the amount in the blood at this time is equivalent to injecting 1300mg right off the bat as zyg has demonstrated).

3 weeks after the last shot, 325mg of deca remain in the system. that is far too much to permit recovery.

5 weeks after that last shot, 81mg remain in the system.. Still a bit too high to begin clomid therapy.

8 weeks after the last deca injection, about 32 mg remain in the system.

Keep in mind that this 4-8 week period is DEAD TIME where are you not able to recover natural T yet you are also not making any gains from the AAS.

Solution? Cut the deca AT LEAST 5 weeks before you plan to be off... You can replace this with nandrolone phenyl propionate or trenbolone acetate for the remainder of the cycle. The waiting period to being clomid therapy is much shorter with compounds like TA.

Andy
 
##spiderbaby## said:

Oh and without divulging too much info, who are you and how do you have this knowledge?
##spiderbaby##

I was almost a Backstreet Boy.. It was between me and AJ (this was before they were so popular.) They chose AJ b/c they wanted someone a little bit older. They aimed to draw more popularity from the "mid-twenties" crowd instead of being just another New Kids on the Block. My dancing skills were superior to his... But he sang a little better than me, besides, there were already two tenors in the group.

So now I'm a senior in college majoring in Art. Chemistry is one of my hobbies.

Andy
 
Last edited:
Ok boys and girls, now we are having fun....cooking with fire some might say. Well, here is another installment from yours truely. As we have seen up the thread here, not only does injection frequency help to level blood levels of a given AAS but we have also see how frontloading can get the thereputic AAS levels in the blood up quicker.

Now, I present to you a little chart that represents both frequency of injection AND front loading. For the standard no load cycle I used deca, 400mg a week total with 100mg shot on mon, wed, fri and sunday. The next represents the first two weeks frontloaded at 800mg total, 4x injections of 200mg each done on monday, wed, fri and sunday. With the remainder of the cycle shooting 4x 100mg injections on mon, wed, fri and sun. And last but not least, we have the one week frontload of 1200mg in 4 shots, 4x 300mg each done on mon, wed, fri and sunday. With the remainder of the cycle shooting 4x 100mg injections on mon, wed, fri and sun.


Drum roll please........... :D ..hehe, i couldnt resist.
deca-front-multiple.jpg
Notice the peaks and valleys in between injections. Multiple inj of even long lasting esters should provide a much more constant theraputic blood level and with it better gains.
 
So now you are saying I need a damn IV drip for my gear?

Well, for several reasons, if I don't have to, I won't inject frequently. I think everytime you have a foreign object pierce your skin, you risk infection. Plus I really, really hate needles. They give me the willies.

So, if I have deca or eq, I will frontload, but if I can get away with one inject/week or 2/week, I will. I would rather do 3ccs in my glute on a Monday, than 1cc on M-W-F.

But I will frontload. You got me on that one, lol.
 
Yeah Tx of course there is the issue of scar tissue as well. If your a young up and comming competitor and have years of juicing a head of you that needs to be done to be able to compete, saving the scar tissue is a real plus. However, for the old fart, weekend warrior like myself scar tissue wont be a huge issue. Since I will be running fina in every cycle I do, im poking myself ed anyways, so why not break up the long ester AAS and interspurse it in while im doing it? At least thats my take on it :D
 
i like the chart!!! one question though... there really isnt that big a difference between the frontload of 800 and 1200.... so when i frontload my eq, is it ok to shoot 2cc on monday and 2cc on thursday for the first 2 weeks??? then 400/week for the next 10? make sence?? thanks for the help!!!
 
So exactly what would you advice to do in this case, Im on my fifth week of the following cycle:

1-5 d-bol
1-5 cyp test 400mg.
5-10 cyp test 800mg.
1-10 equipoise
1-10 deca

as deca and equipoise have long acting esters, would it be advisable to cut both of them off, on 6 or 7 week, and continue with fina (I have sensitive kidneys, so Id rather not), but how about using orals the last weeks, or increase the test mg. with a short acting ester to 1200mg. or leave it the same dose with the cyp?

BTW great info Andy and Zyg, thanks for sharing it.

:smash:
 
i like the chart!!! one question though... there really isnt that big a difference between the frontload of 800 and 1200.... so when i frontload my eq, is it ok to shoot 2cc on monday and 2cc on thursday for the first 2 weeks???

blown93302, no there is not a lot of difference, but at the same time you have to think of our goals when frontloading. The numbers across the bottom represent days. While the 1200mg front load does not get quite as high at the beginning as the 2 week/800mg wk frontload, it does get to a high level about 5 days faster where as the no load cycle would not even reach those levels until about 33 days into it. This means that you should see results from the long lasting esters much faster and overall the cycle should be more efficient.

As for how you break up the dose, thats entirely up to you, if you want to only do two pokes a day, go for it. As you can see by the frequency chart, 1x VS 2x a week, the 1x a week has approximatly a 20% fluctuation in blood levels of active de-esterfied deca. Just think if you can add 20% more mass than you normally would by simply bleaking up the injections and taking them more frequently.


So exactly what would you advice to do in this case, Im on my fifth week of the following cycle:

DEI, no offense intended here, just an honest opinion, but cycle planning should be done before the cycle, not 5 weeks into it. Having said that and the fact your 5 weeks into it allready, I would just ride it out as you have planned. Then, next go round, if you so choose, take andy's advice and plan a new cycle utilizing some of the theories presented. Dont fret, your cycle is by no means wasted, you perhaps are just not getting as much as you can from it, if that makes sense. Just be aware that blood levels from the eq and deca will be with you for a while and as thier levels drop and no exogenous AAS comming in so your gains will diminush and perhaps even suffer while you wait for AAS levels to drop enough for clomid to be effective post cycle as Andy had pointed out previously.
 
DEI said:
So exactly what would you advice to do in this case, Im on my fifth week of the following cycle:

1-5 d-bol
1-5 cyp test 400mg.
5-10 cyp test 800mg.
1-10 equipoise
1-10 deca

as deca and equipoise have long acting esters, would it be advisable to cut both of them off, on 6 or 7 week, and continue with fina (I have sensitive kidneys, so Id rather not), but how about using orals the last weeks, or increase the test mg. with a short acting ester to 1200mg. or leave it the same dose with the cyp?

BTW great info Andy and Zyg, thanks for sharing it.

:smash:


I would definetly cut the eq and deca at week 6 and add fina.

Also-- there is no clinical evidence (that i know of) that says that fina is any harder on the kidneys than any other AAS. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Andy
 
Hey Zyg---- How about a chart for a 2x load of deca on day one and then 200mg twice weekly after that?

Also, could you trim some of the time off of the end of the chart so that there is more space between days?
 
Andy13 said:


He's right. The use of a shorter ester in the beginnig of a cycle along with the longer one until it reaches full theraputic level is essentially the same as front loading..

But, that same result can be achieved by just loading the long ester.. You can save the shorter ester for the end.

Andy

ahhhhhh haaaa......now let's consider the economics of how to front load as we are not rich....ok I'm upper middle but my toys are ruining me.

Prop is about $50 for 20ml.....vs.......Cyp $65 for 10ml.....this is another reason I think front loading with them both to get blood levels up fast so nothing is wasted is cheaper this way.

Prop in the short run at the beginning and at the end is a cheap way to to go.......prop only becomes expensive in the long run.

So.....cyp 200 mgs 2 x's p/w & cheap prop 50ms ed for only a week brings it up to 750 to 800mgs per week right off the bat.....then the dbol or anadrol finishes off the numbers......no?
 
Last edited:
I applaud your efforts here guys. I think if this helps people understand more about what they are doing it's great. It seems to me however you are over-complicating a pretty basic cycling concept. It's kind of like having a chemist give me a 500 word explanation, w/graphs, of why I need to change my oil. Mental masterbation is how I describe it.
I haven't read anywhere where you explain that all this changes and is different from person to person depending on their size and age. which is most likely WHY no one other than you Andy has written this up as an absolute formula. It's not.
There is a lot of useful information in this so people should take note of it. But don't forget a grain of salt.
 
Damn, I thought I knew my shit till I came here, I'm new to the internet sites and have learned more here, as far as application than any book i've picked up. Have just started eq/dec/win/provi. and have changed it a million times based on info, wish this was up sooner. u the man...Drock
 
ulter said:
I applaud your efforts here guys. I think if this helps people understand more about what they are doing it's great. It seems to me however you are over-complicating a pretty basic cycling concept. It's kind of like having a chemist give me a 500 word explanation, w/graphs, of why I need to change my oil. Mental masterbation is how I describe it.
I haven't read anywhere where you explain that all this changes and is different from person to person depending on their size and age. which is most likely WHY no one other than you Andy has written this up as an absolute formula. It's not.
There is a lot of useful information in this so people should take note of it. But don't forget a grain of salt.

(sigh) Ok Utler.. since we cannot account for the differences from person to person, then documented clinical reports such as half life is all we have to go on.

Simply saying "It's different from person to person" is the easy thing to say. I always joke and say that that is what you say when you want to disagree with something but don't have anything intellegent to say.

Could you please be a little more specific on WHICH components that we have covered in this thread that you feel are not valid?
 
Andy, I think, what Ulter tried to say, that there's no "perfect" cycle, and what you are insisting is "perfect" is just as close as it gets. It is great information, and it is very important to everyone to read it, especially with so many, many, many bs posts.
It's still a matter of choice, even for ones who already knew, the basics that you outlined so well.
You know, some people have different goals, then others, some have different genetics, some are younger, some older, some compete, some really laid back, etc, etc...
And, BTW, if you check AnabolicExtreme articles by Jasson Mueller, not sure about spelling of his name, sorry Jasson, he already did made those points, that you are stressing out now.
What I want to say, is , thank you, for GREAT POST, personally, I wish more people were as serious about scientific approach to steroids as you are! Nevertherless, don't be in a bullgod's position next to its bone, just because some other people come from practical point of view, it's not critisism, it's addition.
 
Andy13 said:
If you are planning a 10 week cycle, the goal is to be at highest blood concentrations for as many of the 10 weeks as possible.
Andy

An OK, post, but I don't agree with that statement.

The goal of most people has nothing to do with that.

Their goal is results, with manageble sides.

No one (this is laughable) says "hey, dig me, the BBng stud-man, becuase I maintained a high blood concentration ...". LOL

People want results. Lean mass. Low sides. Thats what they want. Now it may be true that for many guys (not all) that means high and consistent blood concentration is the best way. But thats not their goal.

Great info though in the post.

I would make one important caveat.

From what I have seen, people who are susceptible to acne tend to have worse flare-ups whenever there is a very very rapid change in hormone levels. Think about it - for many guys, its the first few weeks when acne flares up ... then its flares up again when clomid is kicking natural Test back in.

Front loading (whether using a high-dose long-acting ester or a faster-ester to get things moving quickly) is great and will help effectiveness and results (because of the reasons Andy said). However for guys who are veryt acne-prone, allowing a longer acting ester to efect a more gradual "ramping" up of their Test levels may be an option to consider.
 
No one (this is laughable) says "hey, dig me, the BBng stud-man, becuase I maintained a high blood concentration ...". LOL

People want results. Lean mass. Low sides. Thats what they want. Now it may be true that for many guys (not all) that means high and consistent blood concentration is the best way. But thats not their goal.

Riker29, you seem to be missing the point a little here unless I am missreading you. You say people want results, but in the end results DO come from consistent blood levels. As for sides, front loading does not necessarily give any more sides than a standard cycle. The peak dose does not vary much, if at all from a front load to a standard cycle. If you dont think consistent blood levels play a crucial role in gains, try your next cycle with 1g of prop shot once a week and see how your body does as you follow the bouncing ball. An exageration yes, but maybe that helps to get the point across.

As for your acne comments, very good point, however, if you notice blood levels on a non frontloaded cycle are never very constant, they climb through the whole thing. SO if your theory of changing hormone levels are at the root of acne, then perhaps a cycle that imposes a change, gets blood levels up fast and keeps them there will offer less sides?

I applaud your efforts here guys. I think if this helps people understand more about what they are doing it's great. It seems to me however you are over-complicating a pretty basic cycling concept.
Perhaps thier should have been a disclaimer in andy's post, but at the same time its hard for anyone to cover all the bases and fend off all potential attacks. It has been stated before by both andy and myself that we both understand there are a great many variables. There is not only product injected, but location of injection as well as injection volume. These are things that little has been done to quantify and then only on a small group of AAS and a small variance in inj location. Just because there are variances does not mean we can not try and make what we do know and have control over a little clearer.

You say that we are overcomplicating a pretty basic cycleing concept, but in essence we are not over complicating anything, just trying to add some light to a subject that has been discussed with no evidence or clarification to back it. I dont think Andy's goal, and I know mine wasnt, to complicate anything, but add some credability, with numbers and pictures. A means to educate and not confuse. Half life computation is not rocket science and anyone can do it, if they take the time. Andy has posted the formula and explained it well enough that anyone can incorporate it. One a side note, I dont think anyone has come out and said cycle this way or not at all, these are just more ideas for people to experiment with and take for a test drive to see how they fare.

Some people come here and throw up a cycle for opinions and every now and then we still see a cycle that pyramids and everyone is quick to act and say thats old school. Keep it straight line throughout. Recenty there have been some saying to front load if anything. I would bet that a couple years down the road some one will post a flat dose cycle and be told to front load, flat dose cycles are old school. Just because something works does not mean it cant be improved.
 
Last edited:
Supernova thread!

This should be bumped up forever. You gave us yet another informative post Andy! Thanks for the advice you have gave.
 
ahhhhhh haaaa......now let's consider the economics of how to front load as we are not rich....ok I'm upper middle but my toys are ruining me.

Storm Shadow, a couple things to consider with your idea. When you look at the numbers, you see that a no front load style cycle just continually rises until the end. A front loaded cycle peaks fast and stays somewhat level from there on out. If I follow your line of thought and start a cycle with short esters, if my goal is to keep blood levels steady of unesterfied AAS then I would in essence have to use the short esters almost to the end of the cycle, just lowering thier doses as the blood levels from the long esters climb. Did I explaine that good enough, do you see where I am comming from?
 
Hey Zyg---- How about a chart for a 2x load of deca on day one and then 200mg twice weekly after that?

Also, could you trim some of the time off of the end of the chart so that there is more space between days?

Ok, here is one showing a 1200mg dose of deca (10 day half life) inj on monday with subsequent inj on wed and sat of 200mg each for the remainder of cycle.



deca-front.jpg
 
Zyglamail & Andy.....I'm totally agreeing with you. When I say short esters......I don't mean just short esters......
I'm saying that the combo of no ester & long esters in front loading kills that pyramid. Blood Serum Testosterone levels not only go sky high in the first day & stay up there.....the suspension is immediately available for use in the body.

I'm agreeing with you in that the gradual rise in test really wastes a lost of testosterone and time.....the way most people cycle....you may be half way through your cycle before the concentration is proper and stays up there....even Roberts agrees with that...I'm going to find out where I read him saying that.

Where Robert had not really touched & I'm glad you both brought it up......Roberts talked about how to end a cycle & how too many end it improperly of when they start therapy to bring natural test levels up. Using short esters or no esters brings about therapy much faster. Let's say....somebody is ending a cycle with sust or deca or something like that.....at the time Clomid becomes effective......test levels in the body is too low for too long bringing about shock....loss of strength.....muscle....etc. Prop & Suspension will keep it high until you start your Clomid Therapy. I'm not sure but I think (I'll have to check), Clomid can start 48hrs after last Suspension Injection. Deca or sust....14 days? Is that correct?
 
Clomid can start 48hrs after last Suspension Injection. Deca or sust....14 days? Is that correct?
I dont think suspension will have a half life of more than a day tops. With no ester to slow it down, it in, on a receptor and gone in no time. I would say starting clomid after suspension could start within 12 hours, but cant say with any certainty.

As for clomid in general, that is something else we can get from running the numbers. Our current thoughts on recovery may be sufficient, but not ideal. Running the numbers shows us blood levels all the way down to nil. The question now is, at what levels of a given product is clomid effective? This will likely vary from AAS to AAS but if we can round up those numbers and use them in conjunction with the numbers in graphs, we should theoretically be able to chose a starting point for clomid more accuratly. I believe The Iron Game is working on locating some of these numbers.
 
ZYGLAMAIL.

I agree with you about planning the cycle before starting it, so I did, it is just that after reading this thread, I started to wander what would be the best way to finish specially this cycle, as you said maybe I should finish it just the way it was planned, and take these theories for the next cycles, or use Fina as Andy 13 advice, or just orals, as I loose a good amount of my gains even using the gainskeeper formula, anyway the main answer I was looking to get regarding my question was a practical use of the theory in a cycle like mine.

Zyg and Andy thanks for your answers.
 
In math only the ideal of front loading it great. It gets the levels up real fast.

The question is: Is it safer to allow your body a few weeks to adjust to the increased levels?

It can't be wise to inject 1200mgs of Deca in one day.

A slower increase would keep water bloat, strech marks, be safer on your heart, and not so hard on your tendons/joints.
 
Last edited:
ryker77 said:
In math only the ideal of front loading it great. It gets the levels up real fast.

The question is: Is it safer to allow your body a few weeks to adjust to the increased levels?

It can't be wise to inject 1200mgs in one day.

A slower increase would keep water bloat, strech marks, be safer on your heart, and not so hard on your tendons/joints.

These are good points to consider.

I think no one can argue about the potential benefits of front-loading with short esters in order to get blood level up quickly. And I think for more experienced users, this is a great strategy.

I think though that this should be be carefully considered whenever someone is less experienced. I know that for my self, the first time I would (if I ever *did* of course, hehe, after all, ....) ever use any Test, I would WANT a more gradual ramp-up, to sort of see how things are going, see how I react, etc.

And the issues regarding potential bloat, stretch marks (good pt), and what I said about acne (which is not "Fact" per se, its just an observation based on seeing peoplke reactions) are things which may mak it a good idea for a relative newbie to go ahead and LET the longer acting ester create a moire gradual ramp-up of levels within their system.

But for the experienced guys, yeah, creating an overal stategy which allows them to maximize effectiveness by creating a high and relatively constant blood level is very smart.
 
The question is: Is it safer to allow your body a few weeks to adjust to the increased levels?

Well, here is kind of how I look at it. When we pop a bunch of orals or suspension with no ester...BAM! we get immediate raise in blood levels. This is really no different than a front load. And as mentioned, even in a front load of 1 single injection of triple the base cycle amount blood levels still do not reach the peak of what they will during the cycle. Even though there is a large amount in our systems, it is not usable due to the ester and our bodies can only hydrolize so much at a time as well. If raising blood levels fast was a detriment and so feared, then I would think people would be avoiding orals and no ester suspension like the plague.

It can't be wise to inject 1200mgs in one day.
Personally I kind of agree here and the reason being is it would be a HUGE depot. Even with 200mg/ml EQ thats 6ml. I personally will stick to breaking up my front load over the first week or two.


A slower increase would keep water bloat, strech marks, be safer on your heart, and not so hard on your tendons/joints.
Once again, think of orals. In addition keep in mind that even with a large amount of usable AAS it can take weeks for us to notice the effects. Take fina or prop for example. With these short ester products blood levels peak fast (faster than a front loaded long lasting ester) yet there is still a 1-3 week window for effects to be noticed. So in regards to front loading, its still less of a shock than orals or the other powerfull short estered AAS.
 
Last edited:
Zyg, you have some great points. But try and look at it from both sides. I for one think that their is a big difference between taking 50mgs Dbol in one day and 1200mgs Deca in one day.
If you get sick, bad sides, puffy nipples, or want to decrease the dose then with the dbol all you need to do is wait one day. With deca on the other hand you would have over a week of 1200mgs of deca in your system.

Like riker29 said, your ideals should be to the more advanced user. One that has done several cycles. In no way should a newbie inject such a large amount of a long acting ester in a front load.

Again your post is great.
 
In regards to water retention (bloat), on using high front loading esp with shorter esters such as Suspension or Prop.....over at
http://www.anabolicreview.com/drugprof.htm
look up Test Prop & you'll find that it is prefered over the longer esters because it does not cause the water retension & bloating that dbol & cyp/en cause. So I don't think that is an issue in this case.
So............................

I'm planning this cycle to start with Test En, Test Prop (for the beginning & end), dbol, & sust at the beginning & later bring in the Finny (Fina/Winny.....make sure when you use that word you understand I have a Copyright on it as it is now considered a STORM SHADOWism.....when you say Finny.....put the Copyright symbol on it or just a * :p ok I'm being funny now), and dropping out the Longer Esters.

Now I had not decided when I'll come off.....there might be some Deca in there in the middle.

After the sesation of the dbol......I'll go a period with no orals.
I'll have to question if near the end.....to throw in some Anavar.

At this time right now (as I'm waiting for some other stuff to come in), I'm collecting all the stuff to come off. NEVER START A CYCLE WITHOUT THE INGREDIENTS TO COME OFF. If something were to happen & I need to come off quick......I want to know I have the stuff within arms reach.

To date......I'm building a 6 month cycle. I'll cycle in some HCG during this just to keep my buddies from imploding.

Anadrol? hmmmmm have to think about that in there.....no decisions as of yet.

*Liver/Kidneys........I've collected from NOW at the Vitamin Cottage....Cranberry Extract and Silymarin.
*I have about 20 lbs of Gateraide.
*Mass 3/60
*wife is getting me a book this time around so that I can plan my food out....something that will give me a nutrition index so I make sure I get up to 300 grms of protien a day.
*Still have not ordered Arimidex....hmmmmm
*I see a lot of boiled chicken in my future
*She'll be buying me Egg Bagals.....you all should think about that...carbs & protien in those is awesome.
*Looking into Hydo 520 at www.proteinfactory.com to add to my Mass 3/60
*I have a huge bottle of Twin Lab Liquid Amino Fuel which will be replaced as nec.
*I have a lot of creatine (I mean a lot).....I don't know if I believe in it...but I might as well use it during the cycle.
*I have access to Insulin.......but it scares me to much so I guess that's out.
*Looking for somebody that has used the Bovine Serum at proteinfactory & wonder how they managed to get that down their throat.....don't want to add it to my Mass 3/60 & ruin the taste......maybe somebody figured a way to use it in something. It's supposed to be the best & at $22.99 a pound & you only use 2 grams per meal.......holy shit.......you can't beat it......but it's taste will beat you.........to death......muahahahahaha

Anybody want to add to this? Holy shit.......guess I felt like typing today.
This cycle is going to be my greatest experment.
*I'm looking into the internet for programs that I can load into my pc that I can keep track of nutrition....strength.....weight....size....etc, that will also graph things out for me so I can see actual results on paper.\
*Today I'm rehooking up my tanning bed........right in the dinning room.......hahahahaha
*For the last week I rearranged the garage. I have a FULL professional gym.....costed $5g's....it's been disassemble because I sunk $12g's into my basement & turned it into a full living space for my mother-in-law. So yesterday my wife & I reassemble the gym in the garage.....took the whole thing up with the pieces side by side.....that's for my days off from work......because at work we have an awesome fitness center....but don't want to spend to much time there as rumors will spread fast.....rumors spread about me last time I spent 6 mo's in there & everybody had accused me of steroid use even though I have been off at that time for 10 yrs....now it's been 15 clean.....but I grow weary of that bullshit....natural/un-natural....either way doesn't mean shit to me....I respect them both.

Did I leave anything out? Want to add to it? Protection measures? Other Gear? Nutrition? Hit me bros.
 
Like riker29 said, your ideals should be to the more advanced user. One that has done several cycles. In no way should a newbie inject such a large amount of a long acting ester in a front load.

Ryker77, good point but I figured this was assumed. Its a very good idea to know how sensitive you are before you start.

On a side note, its the hydrolization that causes the sides for the most part. Since only so much is hydrolized at a time (as seen in the charts). the massive front load really should not bring about any more sides than you would see at the end of your cycle. But as you pointed out, its still wise to know how you react to a given product before jumping in to be on the safe side. Or have a gallon of liquidex on hand :D
 
ryker77 said:
Zyg, you have some great points. But try and look at it from both sides. I for one think that their is a big difference between taking 50mgs Dbol in one day and 1200mgs Deca in one day.
If you get sick, bad sides, puffy nipples, or want to decrease the dose then with the dbol all you need to do is wait one day. With deca on the other hand you would have over a week of 1200mgs of deca in your system.

Like riker29 said, your ideals should be to the more advanced user. One that has done several cycles. In no way should a newbie inject such a large amount of a long acting ester in a front load.

Again your post is great.

I couldn't agree more-- only expirienced users should front end load their injectables.

However, I disagree with not being able to control your sides (such as gyno) on a front end load.

Let's take the most extreme type of front end load-- that is, taking a 3x load in one day..

The highest blood concentration will be seen within the first 24 hrs. In this time, if gyno symptoms persist, all one has to do is not inject anymore... Blood concnetrations will only reduce after the first day. Developing gyno is not usually something that happens over night. You are not "screwed" when you inject a large volume and then feel symptoms. Simply do not inject any more if you want to play it TOTALLY safe or decrease the dose.

Besided, as I mentioned previously, front end load shouldn't be done if it's the first time you have used a drug.. If you've used 500mg/week of deca before than there is nothing wrong with doing 1500mg in the first week, ie, the sides will be no worse than what you have already expirienced previously.

Andy
 
No ZYG it was not assumed that you two are making a "formula" for success for VETS ONLY. Do you see the newbies on this thread saying how great this is? Do you know how many weigh 160 pounds at 15% as opposed to how many are 230 at 8%? The problem is that you can't replace a person's experience with writing cycles with a formula or graph. There is no power of reason in a graph. I have been at this 18 years and I will tell you that cycling evolves and changes as we learn more every year. I appreciate yours and andy's knowledge but this is not as smart as it looks unless you two are letting people know that this is an ideal cycle, in a prefect world, with a perfect specimen.
 
Andy, I don't get what that chart means?
To be accurate, it has to show the same dosage, and it is not, so it's kind of misleading. Or, may be, you meant something else, please, explaine...
 
panerai said:
Andy, I don't get what that chart means?
To be accurate, it has to show the same dosage, and it is not, so it's kind of misleading. Or, may be, you meant something else, please, explaine...

Actually, I posted the chart last night just as a test... I suck at excel.

The chart can be seen as an "injection frequency" chart. The fact that slightly more test is used in the 500mg twice/week doesn't matter.. It still shows its deviation from mean blood concentrations.


Andy
 
Andy,

First: Great posts man!

Second: Is this a proper application of your theory:

I had planned Sust 500/ Deca 400 for ten weeks. Should i instead do:

sust 500 weeks 1-10
Deca 800 weeks 1-3
Deca 400 weeks 4-7

This would get the deca out of my system at the proper time to start clomid with the sust (two weeks later)

Thanks bro,
Whoopazz
 
Andy13 said:
Ideally, the more often injected, the better. An acceptable rule of thumb is "inject at half of the half life." For instance, if the half life of a steroid is 7 days, this should be injected at least twice weekly. For cycles that involve multiple injectables, the injections should be fractioned out and divided up based on the injectable with the shortest half life....
Andy


Great post andy - this paragraph itself is something I will be considering next cycle.

peace,
 
I think this is important and overlooked... Each injectable should be looked at as contributing to the entire blood AAS concentration..

Andy
 
I owe this to Bill Roberts.. Most of these ideas are scattered throughout his articles.


This just sums up how a modern cycle should look.

Andy
 
Andy13 said:


I couldn't agree more-- only expirienced users should front end load their injectables.

Besided, as I mentioned previously, front end load shouldn't be done if it's the first time you have used a drug.. If you've used 500mg/week of deca before than there is nothing wrong with doing 1500mg in the first week, ie, the sides will be no worse than what you have already expirienced previously.

Andy

Andy, how about a Test newbie but have cycled other anabolics before? If front end loading is the most optimal way of cycling, what would be the rationale against newbies doing it?
 
No ZYG it was not assumed that you two are making a "formula" for success for VETS ONLY. Do you see the newbies on this thread saying how great this is?
Point taken Ulter, but at the same time, Andy could have a 3 line or 3 page disclaimer stating all of the things that are obvious to vets for the new guys to read and in the end there will still be those that disregard the words of warning and proceed anyways. I am here to learn and share knowledge, not be someones mommy. Now please dont take that wrong, I definatly dont want to see anyone get hurt, from my ramblings or any one elses, but I can only take so much responsibility. In the end what each of us do to our own body is our very own responsibility.

Andy, how about a Test newbie but have cycled other anabolics before? If front end loading is the most optimal way of cycling, what would be the rationale against newbies doing it?
yiyangzhi, the rationale is the same regardless of the product. If you do not know how you react to a given AAS, its always wise to ease into it. Technically speaking a front load should offer no more danger than a standard flat cycle, but that is on paper and where one person may be able to hadle a steep rise in blood levels another may not handle it nearly as favorably. The point in general is be safe and know how you tolerate a givven AAS before doubling or triple the dose for a front load.
 
Ok, there is alos a lot of talk and concern about front loading sust. While I think fornt loading it is a good idea, I think the frontload should be lighter due to the fast acting esters present in sust. In my personal opinion our goals should be to get blood levels up to the point where there will be throughout the cycle and have them at a steady point during our cycle. Front loading accomplishes this with long lasting esters. Short life esters its really not needed, but there seems to be some controversy regarding products that contain both.

Here is a graph representing 2 cycles. One is a straight 500mg per week of sust consisting of 2x 250mg injections taken on monday and thursday. The second represents a front load of 1000mg per week for the first two weeks consisting of 2x 500mg inejctions on monday and thurs.

sust-front.jpg


As you notice the spike at the front takes blood levels higher than they would normally get dureing the flat cycle as well as higher than they will ever get on thr front load cycle. This in my mind is where problems can occure. In front loading for the longer lasting esters the initial spike is never more than the the cycle average. Without running the numbers my guess is that doing a 3x flat dose front load in the first week peaks it even higher and should be avoided. I still think frontloading sust is probably beneficial, but should be done a little more conservativly than the long lasting esters. perhaps 1.5x flat cycle dose for the first two weeks as opposed to 2x for 2 weeks or 3x for one week.
 
I think that's a very good point.. And even moreso, sustanon is a little "faster" than what your graph depicts when you take molecular weight into consideration.. The deconate reduces from 100mg per amp to about 65mg...


I'm infavor of loading sustanon... But I think it should be treated like enanthate... And a 2x load over the course of the first 4 days (or if you're like me, you will do it all on day one) and then EOD injections from there..

Andy
 
Ok, since there seems to be so much worry over the apparent large amount of AAS inj using front load principles. I created another graph to outline one of the points Andy and I have been trying to stress.

There seems to be the notion that 600mg of test is 600mg of test and that is all there is to it. I have tried to explaine that short half life estered AAS peak much faster than long half life estered AAS and that short half life estered AAS are actually more likely to cause sides than frontloading a long half life estered AAS.

In an effort to display just what I was trying to get at I calculated the half lives of 5 test esters and graphed them. :

Test Propionate - 2 day half life
Test Phenylpropionate - 3 day half life
Test Isocaproate - 6 day half life
Test Enanthate - 7 day half life
Test Decanoate - 10 day half life

ALL lines in this chart represent the same 600mg dose of a given ester administered via 3x 200mg injections per week taken on monday, wednesday and friday. Now, looking at the data, even though they are same MG per week, the prop peaks almost 30mg higher in the blood than the decanoate!!! And it does do much more rapidly. If you look back at other charts showing fronloaded deca, you will see that the frontload causes blood levels to rise to about the same mg as the cycles highest point. Now look at that and compare it to the short half life estered AAS.

multi-test.jpg
 
Nice...

It also shows how long it takes the deconate to reach full theraputic levels..

If you took the molecular weight into consideration, there would be an even greater difference between the TD and TP..

Andy
 
Could Test enanthate be front loaded like:

Day 1 - 500mg
Day 3 - 500mg
Day 5 - 250mg
Day 7 - 250mg
Day 9 - 250mg
Day 11 - 250mg
Day 13 - 250mg...etc till 8th week.

The front loading(1000mg) is spread between Day 1 and 3 injections. Strictly speaking, Week 1 totalled to 1500mg.
 
Could Test enanthate be front loaded like:
The front load can be done however anyone see's fit basically, what it going to be the most effective is another story. Obviously more frequent inj will offer greater blood level stability which I think plays a big role in the cycle outcome. The two methods that seem to work best, on paper, are 1) 3x intended cycle dose administered in the first week. 2) 2x intended cycle dose for the first two weeks. If I am understanding you layout correct, you doing 1.5x in the first week, which will definatly help to get blood levels up, but not nearly as well as a 2by2 or 1by3 method I listed above. The exception, from looking at the numbers, would be sust. a 1.5x frontload appears to be a decent amount for that due to the various long and short esters within it.
 
kudos on math model, Andy13 (long post)

Andy13,

Your post makes a lot of sense to me. I have a background in physics, so not only can I follow the math, but it also gives me confidence.

Your model appeals to me since it explains simply and beautifully why people do not see gains until the 4 or so week with the longer halflife esters. It also explains why stacking with an oral at the beginning has the same effect as front-loading, i.e. immediately perceivable results at the beginning of a cycle. Your model explains all of these results with a simple model, i.e. test is test, and that results are primarily a direct result of blood levels. And that's it. None of this mucking about with receptor types, receptor binding strengths, class I & II steroids, etc., etc. etc.


So, kudos to you. However, I have a couple of questions for you:

1) How do you calculate from injected test to testosterone blood levels? I understand this equation:

Sigma[ initialInjectionAmount * Exp[ Ln[1/2] (dayOfCycle-dayInjected)/halflife]

(can you tell that I'm a mathematica freak? btw, I find an equation manipulator such as mathematica is easier to use than a spreadsheet like Excel for this kind of model) This is just a summation of decreasing exponentials. Is the conversion from injected test to blood test levels a simple multiplication by a constant? If so, what constant? And, is the constant a function of the type of the type of aas?


2) Do we know that the pharmokinetics of the absorption of the estrified testosterone is such that the rate limiting step is a pure diffusion process (thereby explaining the simple decreasing exponentials?) I see this is probably true, once the estrified testosterone is converted to test and enters the body, since almost all medications have an associated half-life.

However, I have read that while the estrified test resides in oil, hydrolysis is not possible, and therefore the oil acts as a storage depot of the test. As a result, the curves may need to be amended to allow for a time delay of the test's entrance into the body. Now, it could be that this is, in fact, the rate limiting step, and that this process is purely concentration dependent, and therefore is a pure decreasing exponential, however, I just want to be sure of this.


3) Theories are all well and good, but as you know, many appealing theories have been proven wrong. Has this model been corroborated with actual measurements of blood test levels? Is it always a pure decreasing exponential? Do test levels always peak immediately after the injection?


4) Is it possible to extend this model to the synthetic aas's, i.e. to deca, winny, eq, etc. It could be that the reason that stacks are more effective is simply because there is a higher concentration of testosterone like molecules in the body. None of this mucking about with various receptor types, receptor binding strengths, class I&II steroids, etc. etc. Of course, these phenomena may exist, but they may be 2nd order effects, and that the most important thing is simply blood concentration of testosterone-like molecules.


5) Would you argue that an aas that results in large gains (eg test, ad50, dbol)) vs. one that results in "quality" gains (winny, eq, primo, etc.), is mostly (to 1st order) a function of estrification rate? I.e. winny, eq, and primo do not aromatize well, so therefore less estrogen, so therefore less water retention, so therefore more "quality" gains, vs. test, dbol, ad50, which aromatize easily, so therefore, more estrogen, so therefore more water retention, so therefore "lower quality "gains?


6) Would you argue that doing a cycle stacked with orals at the beginning is exactly the same as front loading pure test?


7) Would you argue that an ideal cycle would tailor the halflives and injection times such that the overall blood testosterone levels approximate a step function up at the beginning of the cycle, and a step function down at the end? Or would an ideal cycle include tapering, to allow other systems in the body to accomodate the new substances?

Since your post, I have been calculating step function up and down cycles. You could achieve the former with front loading a long acting test such as enanthate (say 4 injections the 1st 2 days), inject the enanthate at a constant frequency (say, twice a week), and switch four weeks before the end of the cycle to a shorter acting test, such as propionate, injected more frequently (say eod). After the last propionate injection, immediately begin treatment of inhibition and cortisol levels. No wasted time waiting for injected test levels to slowly increase and equilibrate to some steady state level, at whichone may start seeing gains. And no wasted time waiting for test levels to decrease so that one may begin post cycle treatment.

8) Finally, what is the chemical formula for test? The esters, I understand, i.e. OOC-R, however, to calculate molecular weights, I need to know the formula for test.

Thanks, and your input is appreciated.

-Diver
 
1) How do you calculate from injected test to testosterone blood levels? I understand this equation:

Sigma[ initialInjectionAmount * Exp[ Ln[1/2] (dayOfCycle-dayInjected)/halflife]

(can you tell that I'm a mathematica freak? btw, I find an equation manipulator such as mathematica is easier to use than a spreadsheet like Excel for this kind of model) This is just a summation of decreasing exponentials. Is the conversion from injected test to blood test levels a simple multiplication by a constant? If so, what constant? And, is the constant a function of the type of the type of aas?

This is based on the idea that when you inject and esterified AAS, it essentially have two half lives: The depot as an inactive, esterified compound (long half life) and the active compound in the blood once the ester has been removed. The latter is so small and insignificant (2hrs) that it is not taken into account.


2) Do we know that the pharmokinetics of the absorption of the estrified testosterone is such that the rate limiting step is a pure diffusion process (thereby explaining the simple decreasing exponentials?) I see this is probably true, once the estrified testosterone is converted to test and enters the body, since almost all medications have an associated half-life.

However, I have read that while the estrified test resides in oil, hydrolysis is not possible, and therefore the oil acts as a storage depot of the test. As a result, the curves may need to be amended to allow for a time delay of the test's entrance into the body. Now, it could be that this is, in fact, the rate limiting step, and that this process is purely concentration dependent, and therefore is a pure decreasing exponential, however, I just want to be sure of this.

There are indeed other factors that influence diffusion and de-esterification.. The main factors are volume of benzyl alcohol used and total AAS concentration. Secondary factors are size of injection and location.

It is true that esterified testosterone (or any AAS) cannot be de-esterified in the oil. It takes a water molecule to break the ester linkage between the AAS and the carboxylic acid in which it is attached to. In addition to injection concnetration, it's certianly reasonable to think that some AAS and their esters can have greater affinity to estarase enzyme.. However, literature suggests this does not result in any measureable difference in de-esterification. So, the graphs represent blood androgen levels in as pure exponential decay models. Only the "first" half life, the rate at which the de-esterification proceeds is taken into consideration. I consider the other factors such as injection volume to contribute only marginally to the blood levels.



3) Theories are all well and good, but as you know, many appealing theories have been proven wrong. Has this model been corroborated with actual measurements of blood test levels? Is it always a pure decreasing exponential? Do test levels always peak immediately after the injection?

There have been graphs posted that were based on actual blood tests.. One in particular is that of testosterone enanthate. It was very indicative of the "theoretical" graphs I have made just using exponential decay. Some other actual blood graphs show deca peaking out on day 4-5.. This is just one of those things that cannot be taken into consideration. The theoretical graphs assume the AAS begins exponential decay immediately after injection. The 'actual' graphs that showed deca peaking on the fifth day also showed a pretty high amount of deca after the first 24 hrs.. Point being, all injectables peak early. In the case with the deca, there was little difference between the blood levels after day 1-2 and 4-5, meaning, as predicted by the "theoretical graphs," deca is de-esterified so slowly as a result of long ester that the amount release between days deviates very small compared to a faster injectable.. All of this follows amazingly easy from the simple mathematical model


4) Is it possible to extend this model to the synthetic aas's, i.e. to deca, winny, eq, etc. It could be that the reason that stacks are more effective is simply because there is a higher concentration of testosterone like molecules in the body. None of this mucking about with various receptor types, receptor binding strengths, class I&II steroids, etc. etc. Of course, these phenomena may exist, but they may be 2nd order effects, and that the most important thing is simply blood concentration of testosterone-like molecules.
The graphs apply to all types of esterified AAS. The graph is very general and it's hard to say we can slap it on any AAS, but from actual blood test, it apears that all esterified AAS follow this type of behavior. Non-esterified comounds like dbol and winstol do not follow such a graph. Their graph would be much more difficult to do since it has one real exponential half life.. And much more goes into it especially when the compounds are injected.. There is also a lot of debate on the half life of winstrol.. A 17aa group most definetly increases the half life but there isn't a lot of data on it.

5) Would you argue that an aas that results in large gains (eg test, ad50, dbol)) vs. one that results in "quality" gains (winny, eq, primo, etc.), is mostly (to 1st order) a function of estrification rate? I.e. winny, eq, and primo do not aromatize well, so therefore less estrogen, so therefore less water retention, so therefore more "quality" gains, vs. test, dbol, ad50, which aromatize easily, so therefore, more estrogen, so therefore more water retention, so therefore "lower quality "gains?

Absolutely. Compounds like trenbolone and deca are alleged to have strictly "AR effects" or effects directly through androgen receptor agonization. Comounds like dbol and andadrol are not good AR binders and cause the most water retention. Their mode of action is said to be largly "outside" of the AR. Keep in mind that documentaion of ANABOLISM from AAS that does not occur through the AR has never been demonstrated to exist. That's not to say that it doesnt.. I my opinion, AR agonization results in at least 90% of muscle growth.


6) Would you argue that doing a cycle stacked with orals at the beginning is exactly the same as front loading pure test?

No. Loading injectables means getting "AR binding AAS' up to speed. I think taking dbol in the beginning of a cycle is inferior to loading injectables.. As I said, it's my opinion that most of the growth occurs through the AR.. ANd loading those compounds is VER beneficail. Loading by taking dbol in the beginning just gives rise to a superficial bloated feeling that no doubt increases strenghth, but is inferior to loading of injectables.


7) Would you argue that an ideal cycle would tailor the halflives and injection times such that the overall blood testosterone levels approximate a step function up at the beginning of the cycle, and a step function down at the end? Or would an ideal cycle include tapering, to allow other systems in the body to accomodate the new substances?

Since your post, I have been calculating step function up and down cycles. You could achieve the former with front loading a long acting test such as enanthate (say 4 injections the 1st 2 days), inject the enanthate at a constant frequency (say, twice a week), and switch four weeks before the end of the cycle to a shorter acting test, such as propionate, injected more frequently (say eod). After the last propionate injection, immediately begin treatment of inhibition and cortisol levels. No wasted time waiting for injected test levels to slowly increase and equilibrate to some steady state level, at whichone may start seeing gains. And no wasted time waiting for test levels to decrease so that one may begin post cycle treatment.

That is exaclty why I advocate switching to shorter esters to end a cycle... I think the ideal graph of a cycle would look like a rectangle.. That is, it would be at it's highest blood levels for the entire cycle, from beginning to end.. ANd then it would END so that clomid therapy can begin. traditional cycles are pyramids, even if they inject the same amount throughout the cycle.. they are still pyramids.

8) Finally, what is the chemical formula for test? The esters, I understand, i.e. OOC-R, however, to calculate molecular weights, I need to know the formula for test.

I think the molecuar weight for test is 284.. But let me check on that.
Andy
 
Last edited:
1) How do you calculate from injected test to testosterone blood levels?

This is based on the idea that when you inject and esterified AAS, it essentially have two half lives: The depot as an inactive, esterified compound (long half life) and the active compound in the blood once the ester has been removed. The latter is so small and insignificant (2hrs) that it is not taken into account.

Ok, so is the way you do this calculation, the following:

1) Start with the amount of injected AAS. Ex: 250mg injection of enanthate

2) Convert to number of molecules of enanthate.

Ex: the molecular formula of enanthate is: test-OOC-(CH2)5-CH3. The molecular weight is:

test - 284
C - 12*7 = 84
O - 16*2 = 16
H - 13*1 = 13

Total = 284+84+16+13 = 397

Therefore the number of molecules of enanthate is 0.250g/(397 g/mol) = 0.63e-3 mol of enanthate = 379e18 molecules of enanthate

3) However, the ester portion of the molecule is biologically inert, so after it is cleaved via hydrolysis, we have 0.63 mol of testosterone = 379e18 molecules of testosterone... :-)

4) So, then we convert back to units of mass.

Ex: (0.63 mol) (284 g/mol) = 179e-3 = 179mg of testosterone

So, I calculate that the initial dosage of test from a 250mg shot of enanthate is 179mg. However, this is more than an order of magnitude off from the graphs that are posted. Am I doing this wrong? Please correct me, if I am...

-Diver
 
i was a tad off on the molecular weight of testoerone.. It's 288.. And the molecular weight of T-enanthate is 400. So T-enanthate is 72% testosterone.. So, when 250mg of t-enanthate is injected, you are getting 180mg of test. So you've got the molecular weight calculation down.

I was lazy and on some of these graphs I didn't take molecular weight into consideration.. It's fine when we're dealing with graphs of the same ester but can make a difference when you graph more than one ester at a time... For instance, when I did the sustanon graphs and took the molecular weight into consideration, the graph was very indicative of a graph of a single ester testosterone with a half life of between 4-6 days. I give the range of 4-6 days since there seems to be some debate on the acutal half lives of the esters.. But sustanon can deffinetly be regarded as a single ester testosterone with a half life of 4-6 days.

Mathematically, the esters in sustanon cannot be grouped together.. However once graphed, it does look very much like a single ester testosterone..



"So, I calculate that the initial dosage of test from a 250mg shot of enanthate is 179mg. However, this is more than an order of magnitude off from the graphs that are posted. Am I doing this wrong? Please correct me, if I am...

-Diver"

Sorry, let me clarify. When I did the graphs, I used the expontial function and then subtracted it from the next day. That way the graph reads mg-released/day. If you only graphed the exponential function, you would have the amount of esterified, inactive test in your system.. which WOULD be an order of a magnitude off.

So, sorry.. about that little detail..

Aside, I forgot to add.. I think a step funtion would work great with this.. But the results will be the same.. It would save some time on a graphics calculator but not really on the almighty Excel!!

Andy
 
Whether or not these theories/equations are right, it is still fairly interesting. No sense on having ANDY do all this typing only to have it slip into the archives so damn fast. So i'm giving it a big BUMP!

BMJ
 
Have you gotten a chance to read this post? It's from a person that frontloaded omnadren, but didn't see any results early on:
Actually, yes I have read it. I am frontloading my current cycle 1220mg enth and EQ for first 2 and 600mg each after that. I noticed the effects by the end of week 2.

Now, for the guy who used the omna, I would have to say he likely responds a bit slower than most to begin with and people who respond slow normally will also respond slower to a frontload. For the most part, that is the only negative post I have seen from those that have frontloaded....and really his post was not all that begative, he just did not get the response he felt he would have.
 
Great post as always andy?

Just out of curiosity, what would prevent someone from attaching a shorter ester to the Boldenone molecule? That would make our lifes less complicated in those last 4 weeks of a cycle.
 
Top Bottom