Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
Ledhead Unleashed!
- Thread starter ledhead
- Start date
- Status
Ifonly
Member
Thanks!! Glad to hear from you...
Lol @ unorthodox. Yeah, sometimes I wonder if I'm not Dr. Mengele reincarnated with all my crazy experiments.
Yaw, I have used it before a couple times and I have concluded that it is utterly worthless. I had minimal gains from it, and I used between 50-80 MCGs different times ED for 6-8 weeks.
When I do an experiment or case study I always insert a chemical into my regimen when I think my cycle has peaked; that is to see if that chemical will boost my cycle, and so that I can't really attribute too many gains to the cycle. I did not notice any muscle gains whatsoever the three times I used IGF-1 LR3 nor any fat loss benefits from it, and did not notice a boost in my cycle.
Imo, insulin blows it away. I gained 13 lbs while dieting once I inserted slin into regimen. I posted my slin protocol for beginners in some thread, I suggest you bump it. Also, slin is dirt cheap compared to IGF-1 LR3, so you get jacked and save a ton of money using slin.
Also, the consensus from the people in my area and from my friends around the country is that IGF-1 LR3 and the other ones are highly faked, which means you are taking a risk losing a lot of money for a product that might be fake and might not even work if it's real. At least you know you are getting real slin from the pharmacy.
Don't believe the hype!!
Thanks led. Most helpful I'll look Into this.
Measurement of myostatin concentrations in human serum:
Circulating concentrations in young and older men and effects
of testosterone administration.
I mentioned a couple times on this board how Myostatin will stall a cycle by week 8, so I got a few PMs from people wanting me to expound on the subject. The only person on this board that I noticed who understands this concept is Montana, however, there could be others that understand, but I have not noticed. But I do notice people giving other people erroneous advice to run 12-16 week cycles, those length of cycles are utterly worthless because by day 56 Myostatin levels are ridiculously high, which means LBM gains will stall without a doubt. I hate that our bodies do that horrible thing just like the next guy should know this and hate it, but it is a biological certainty that has to be addressed, so people will not be misled anymore and will not believe the bro lore and mythology that is being spread on these boards.
The latest myth that I have read on here lately is that EQ has to be ran at a minimal 16 weeks for a person to see optimum gains from that hormone, that is pure heresy and I challenge anyone on this board to prove me wrong through absolute science because I gonna debunk that myth with absolute science. There is no basis for 12-16 week cycles, absolutely none. The article specifically says by day 56 Myostatin thwarts LBM gains, which means it would be virtually impossible for anyone to make any new gains from weeks 8-16. However, there is light at the end of the tunnel and that is by week 20 the cycle starts to baseline again, and LBM gains resume, which means the entire essence of taking steroids for making quality gains is to do 8 week cycles or just stay on. The people in my circle and myself have known this for years, that's why we stay on.
Again, to utilize your gear to the utmost and to make the most quality gains is to do 8 week cycles or stay on.
If the link don't work then just Google the title.
Circulating concentrations in young and older men and effects
of testosterone administration.
I mentioned a couple times on this board how Myostatin will stall a cycle by week 8, so I got a few PMs from people wanting me to expound on the subject. The only person on this board that I noticed who understands this concept is Montana, however, there could be others that understand, but I have not noticed. But I do notice people giving other people erroneous advice to run 12-16 week cycles, those length of cycles are utterly worthless because by day 56 Myostatin levels are ridiculously high, which means LBM gains will stall without a doubt. I hate that our bodies do that horrible thing just like the next guy should know this and hate it, but it is a biological certainty that has to be addressed, so people will not be misled anymore and will not believe the bro lore and mythology that is being spread on these boards.
The latest myth that I have read on here lately is that EQ has to be ran at a minimal 16 weeks for a person to see optimum gains from that hormone, that is pure heresy and I challenge anyone on this board to prove me wrong through absolute science because I gonna debunk that myth with absolute science. There is no basis for 12-16 week cycles, absolutely none. The article specifically says by day 56 Myostatin thwarts LBM gains, which means it would be virtually impossible for anyone to make any new gains from weeks 8-16. However, there is light at the end of the tunnel and that is by week 20 the cycle starts to baseline again, and LBM gains resume, which means the entire essence of taking steroids for making quality gains is to do 8 week cycles or just stay on. The people in my circle and myself have known this for years, that's why we stay on.
Again, to utilize your gear to the utmost and to make the most quality gains is to do 8 week cycles or stay on.
If the link don't work then just Google the title.
After reading that I will be stopping my tren e and test e cycle this week. It will be the end of week 8. I loved the strength and gains but I am ready for my pct / sarms run haha!
Led.. How long would you wait to run your pct? Should I wait until both esters clear my system after around 10 -12 days or begin around day 7 like some people have been doing around here. thanks brother.
Led.. How long would you wait to run your pct? Should I wait until both esters clear my system after around 10 -12 days or begin around day 7 like some people have been doing around here. thanks brother.
Lol. What's a PCT? I don't run a PCT. However, I used to, so 2 weeks after your last pin would be fine..
northernknight
New member
Great that you keep bustling these myths! I am always happy when you post something against these interweb-gurus/bro-science/gym mythologies.
So, thanks a lot for posting this article, I will definitely check it throughout, once get to my laptop, I can't seem to open the link in my phone, and browsing web with phone ain't that convenient with my big hands & fat fingers, lol!
I have been thinking that there is something to this, like you mentioned Nelson has posted several times about superiority of shorter cycles.
Although this doesn't directly affect me, since I'm always on (in TRT, Then again it does give one more positive aspect to stay on full time).
It's always great to find more information, especially from scientific point of view.
Btw. I just noticed from the first page of this thread that were getting ready to get up on stage and get your pro-card in this month if I remember right? How is your contest prep coming up? Or has there maybe been some change in your plans? It's been a while since I red this thread trough, so if you have posted updates on your plans, I really can't remember...
This is a great thread in many ways, so I hope you keep it alive.
I also wish you will have all the success that you reach for, you truly deserve all of it!
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Interesting stuff. It does raise two questions I'd love to know if you could help me with:
1. What if any effect does upping the dose during the 8-16 week "dead zone" do? I've seen a number of people lately saying that they have upped their dose of EQ in the latter half of a 16 week cycle from 600 to 900 or 1000. Would that overcome that barrier to new gains?
2. How long after 20 weeks would someone make gains if they stayed on? Would that start another 8 week gain period meaning you'd want to run it for 28 weeks at that point?
Guess you can't refute science. Thats a good read. Here's what I'm wondering though... Although there is some sort of 'cut off' at 8 weeks, what becomes of the gains you made that last week and a few weeks prior? it seems like you would be more likely to lose the gains with them being so new, as opposed to attempting to 'solidify' or sustain them by another 4-8 weeks of cycling. Of course you will always lose some gains, but could there be some truth to this?
Great that you keep bustling these myths! I am always happy when you post something against these interweb-gurus/bro-science/gym mythologies.
So, thanks a lot for posting this article, I will definitely check it throughout, once get to my laptop, I can't seem to open the link in my phone, and browsing web with phone ain't that convenient with my big hands & fat fingers, lol!
I have been thinking that there is something to this, like you mentioned Nelson has posted several times about superiority of shorter cycles.
Although this doesn't directly affect me, since I'm always on (in TRT, Then again it does give one more positive aspect to stay on full time).
It's always great to find more information, especially from scientific point of view.
Btw. I just noticed from the first page of this thread that were getting ready to get up on stage and get your pro-card in this month if I remember right? How is your contest prep coming up? Or has there maybe been some change in your plans? It's been a while since I red this thread trough, so if you have posted updates on your plans, I really can't remember...
This is a great thread in many ways, so I hope you keep it alive.
I also wish you will have all the success that you reach for, you truly deserve all of it!
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Thank you!
Yes, there is a lot of nonsense being peddled on the net. The majority of real weight-trainers/bodybuilders avoid these boards like the plague. But there is a remnant that come around and discuss things.
I am set out to do the IFBB Championships August 30-31 in my hometown of Pittsburgh but I'm thinking I need another year to put on about 10 more quality pounds. I'm 243 @ 4% BF right now.
The mod SuperQT is helping with the technology part, so I can post quality pictures here in the next couple weeks. I will evaluate everything at that point whether or not I should hit that show. I was sitting at 250 then I started to take water pills and I lost 7 lbs in 2 weeks, I did not realize I was holding that much water.
My original plan was not to enter that show under 250, so I really don't know right now. Keep in mind that I just turned 42 a couple weeks ago, so it might be in my best interest to wait another year and come in razor sharp at 250. I don't want to embarrass myself; there will be guys there 5'4 @ 240, and guys at my height 5'8-5'10 @ 250-260. Hence, I might just back off until I'm at a solid 250. But I will let everyone know here in the next couple weeks.
Thanks for the compliments and for following..
- Status
Similar threads
