Ledhead Unleashed!

[ledhead]

so how do you explain people still making gains after the 8 week mark of a cycle? because.. well.. I think it may have happened a few times.

Well, if so, I guarantee you it has nothing to do with the hormone initiating LBM gains. Maybe, they don't know the difference between a nice pump and real LBM gains and assume they are making gains; or maybe some people on here are so great they defy the laws of biology.

 

[ledhead]

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?

Good questions. I got a thinker here. I like that!

First, I introduced that upping the dosing strategy when I got back here from being banned for a long time. Upping the dose should occur when a person thinks adaption occurs, which would more and likely be around the 4 week point. Second, upping EQ (the same hormone) for the second half of a 16 week cycle would make absolutely no significance in their LBM gains. The only thing that would work to extend a cycle a couple weeks to obtain more LBM would be to insert a more "anabolic" compound like tren, and that would only give a person a couple weeks extension. Upping the dose on the same compound would not make a difference at all, that cycle stalls at week 8.

Second, yes, when the cycle starts to baseline again at the 20 week mark another 8 week cycle would be ideal. It would stay baseline from there on out unless you up the doses again.

 

[ledhead]

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?

Good questions!


No, you can't refute science. I stay on all the time but when we used to do 8 week cycles we would insert an oral at weeks 7-11 to avoid a total stall and solidify as much gains as possible. My guess is that it's your body trying to return to normal in both directions. It sees the acceleration of the gene activity causing increased protein synthesis and uses myostatin to slow it down. Consequently, you will keep some gains, but not all. That's the nature of this game.

 

[stevesmi]

Good questions!


No, you can't refute science. I stay on all the time but when we used to do 8 week cycles we would insert an oral at weeks 7-11 to avoid a total stall and solidify as much gains as possible. My guess is that it's your body trying to return to normal in both directions. It sees the acceleration of the gene activity causing increased protein synthesis and uses myostatin to slow it down. Consequently, you will keep some gains, but not all. That's the nature of this game.

true.. i am considering doing a blast and cruise into the end of year and then competing hopefully next year. this is gonna be my strategy.

there comes a point where the body just doesn't want to put on any more mass, totally normal and healthy. so the myost. is purely a biological thing as you said the body protecting itself .. otherwise everyone on here who has juiced would be 400 pounds by now

i think most guys who cycle need to get over the psychological barrier of losing 'gains' when they come off, otherwise they will go grow frustrated and want to just stay on which just isn't necessary unless you are competing

 

[notjake11]

Good questions. I got a thinker here. I like that!

First, I introduced that upping the dosing strategy when I got back here from being banned for a long time. Upping the dose should occur when a person thinks adaption occurs, which would more and likely be around the 4 week point. Second, upping EQ (the same hormone) for the second half of a 16 week cycle would make absolutely no significance in their LBM gains. The only thing that would work to extend a cycle a couple weeks to obtain more LBM would be to insert a more "anabolic" compound like tren, and that would only give a person a couple weeks extension. Upping the dose on the same compound would not make a difference at all, that cycle stalls at week 8.

Second, yes, when the cycle starts to baseline again at the 20 week mark another 8 week cycle would be ideal. It would stay baseline from there on out unless you up the doses again.

Seems like I accidentally stumbled on a solution then - I added Tren into my EQ cycle at the start of week 8.

I had originally planned on running the cycle for 16-20 weeks but you have me considering going to 28 now to get the second round of growth as well as to carry me through the rest of my racing season "on".

Hmmmm. . . .

 

[notjake11]

Another question for you that I haven't seen addressed anywhere else - what do you think of running Tren and GW (sarm) side by side?

When done right, Tren basically prevents your body from shuttling carbs into fat cells and instead just gobbles them up for muscle building and thermogenesis.
GW improves the body's ability to access fat as a preferred fuel source and ups endurance in the process.

Theoretically it would seem that the two would be an ideal match for someone truly looking to shred up. But I haven't seen much (if any) discussion about running them together. Your thoughts?

 

[burnthiscorpse]

what a great thread this is.

 

[ledhead]

true.. i am considering doing a blast and cruise into the end of year and then competing hopefully next year. this is gonna be my strategy.

That's an excellent strategy.

there comes a point where the body just doesn't want to put on any more mass, totally normal and healthy. so the myost. is purely a biological thing as you said the body protecting itself .. otherwise everyone on here who has juiced would be 400 pounds by now

True! The body goes into survival mode and does everything in its power to reach homeostasis, which will eventually win.

i think most guys who cycle need to get over the psychological barrier of losing 'gains' when they come off, otherwise they will go grow frustrated and want to just stay on which just isn't necessary unless you are competing

Very true statement.

 

[ledhead]

Seems like I accidentally stumbled on a solution then - I added Tren into my EQ cycle at the start of week 8.

I had originally planned on running the cycle for 16-20 weeks but you have me considering going to 28 now to get the second round of growth as well as to carry me through the rest of my racing season "on".

Hmmmm. . . .

Well, sometimes doing things on accident helps you learn on your own through trial and error, which I believe is the best school.

Once, you hit week 20 then the cycle will baseline and you can do a full blown cycle without worrying about myostatin thwarting your cycle.

 

[ledhead]

Another question for you that I haven't seen addressed anywhere else - what do you think of running Tren and GW (sarm) side by side?

When done right, Tren basically prevents your body from shuttling carbs into fat cells and instead just gobbles them up for muscle building and thermogenesis.
GW improves the body's ability to access fat as a preferred fuel source and ups endurance in the process.

Theoretically it would seem that the two would be an ideal match for someone truly looking to shred up. But I haven't seen much (if any) discussion about running them together. Your thoughts?

Don't know much about sarms. But from the way you described sarms it sounds like it would go good with tren. Give it a whirl and let us know how they work together.