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

Suppression From Standalone Proviron

tstarks

New member
This thread is regarding Proviron used standalone for non-cycle, non-PCT purposes such as strength gain or aggression in the weight room, libido, muscle hardening, &c. I've often wondered if suppression would become a significant issue when it's used for sometimes prolonged periods in someone with a normal hormonal environment, and if PCT is necessary when using it like this. I've complied a group of studies to find out.


#1 : The effect of mesterolone on sperm count, on serum follicle stimulating hormone, luteinizing hormone, plasma testosterone and outcome in idiopathic oligospermic men.
Abstract
Two hundred fifty subfertile men with idiopathic oligospermia (count less than 20 million/ml) were treated with mesterolone (100-150 mg/day) for 12 months. Seminal analysis were assayed 3 times and serum follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) luteinizing hormone (LH) and plasma testosterone were assayed once before treatment and repeated at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after the initiation of treatment. One hundred ten patients (44%) had normal serum FSH, LH and plasma testosterone, 85 patients (34%) had low serum FSH, LH and low plasma testosterone. One hundred seventy-five patients (70%) had moderate oligospermia (count 5 to less than 20 million/ml) and 75 patients (30%) had severe oligospermia (count less than 5 million/ml). Seventy-five moderately oligospermic patients showed significant improvement in the sperm density, total sperm count and motility following mesterolone therapy whereas only 12% showed improvement in the severe oligospermic group. Mesterolone had no depressing effect on low or normal serum FSH and LH levels but had depressing effect on 25% if the levels were elevated. There was no significant adverse effect on testosterone levels or on liver function. One hundred fifteen (46%) pregnancies resulted following the treatment, 9 of 115 (7.8%) aborted and 2 (1.7%) had ectopic pregnancy. Mesterolone was found to be more useful in patients with a sperm count ranging between 5 and 20 million/ml. Those with severe oligospermia (count less than 5 million) do not seem to benefit from this therapy.

NOTES: Used a large group, most of whom were hormonally normal. LH lowered a bit if it was elevated, but not really relevant because testosterone levels showed no significant change in all subjects anyways.
_________________________________________________________

#2 :Mesterolone treatment of patients with pathospermia.
Abstract
The response to Mesterolone, in doses of 25 mg/day, was examined in 42 pathospermic patients. Treatment lasted for 100 days. The pronounced response to the Mesterolone treatment was observed in hypozoo- and oligozoospermia with low initial fructose content in the ejaculate. Fructose content attained its normal range after the treatment. During the therapeutic period 11 wives became pregnant. The authors conclude that Mesterolone does not influence plasma FSH, LH and testosterone levels, it has only peripheral effects.

NOTES: Low dose over a decent 3 month time frame. No measurable influence on HPTA.
_________________________________________________________

#3 : Plasma cholesterol, triglycerides, FSH and testosterone levels of normolipemic male patients with decreased fertility treated with mesterolone.
Abstract
There were no changes in plasma cholesterol, triglycerides, FSH and testosterone levels of 24 healthy men treated with mesterolone for infertility during period of 6 months. The patients were normolipemic and the daily doses were 75 mg. No side-effects were noticed. Mesterolone seems to have too selective or too low androgenic effect with the doses used in orde to have an influence on the lipid metabolism of men.

NOTES: Decent sized group, again healthy, apart from being infertile. Low-medium dose for a pretty long time period. Again no significant suppression.
__________________________________________________________

# 4: The effects of mesterolone on the male accessory sex organs, on spermiogram, plasma testosterone and FSH.
Abstract
42 subfertile male ambulatory patients were treated with Proviron. Moderate oligoastheno-teratozoospermia was the most common injury in sperm analysis. The treatment did not change the amount of plasma FSH, testosterone or prostate phosphatase. Acid phosphatase and citric acid of semen showed an increased activity with mesterolone treatment. The amount of fructose decreased, it is probably due to the increased number of spermatozoa, which need more fructose for their metabolism respectively. The sperm of 93% of the patients improved or stayed unchanged. 30% of the patients developed normozoospermia. 6 pregnancies were achieved.

NOTES: Here, as well as being infertile, the patients are also bedridden. The reasons for this are not given. Nor is the daily dose amount of mesterolone. By itself, this study is hardly anything at all, but taken together with the above studies which also failed to detect endocrine changes, it can be suggestive and so should be considered.
__________________________________________________________

#5 : Effect of non aromatizable androgens on LHRH and TRH responses in primary testicular failure.
Abstract
We have assessed the gonadotropin, TSH and PRL responses to the non aromatizable androgens, mesterolone and fluoxymestrone, in 27 patients with primary testicular failure. All patients were given a bolus of LHRH (100 micrograms) and TRH (200 micrograms) at zero time. Nine subjects received a further bolus of TRH at 30 mins. The latter were then given mesterolone 150 mg daily for 6 weeks. The remaining subjects received fluoxymesterone 5 mg daily for 4 weeks and 10 mg daily for 2 weeks. On the last day of the androgen administration, the subjects were re-challenged with LHRH and TRH according to the identical protocol. When compared to controls, the patients had normal circulating levels of testosterone, estradiol, PRL and thyroid hormones. However, basal LH, FSH and TSH levels, as well as gonadotropin responses to LHRH and TSH and PRL responses to TRH, were increased. Mesterolone administration produced no changes in steroids, thyroid hormones, gonadotropins nor PRL. There was, however, a reduction in the integrated and incremental TSH secretion after TRH. Fluoxymesterone administration was accompanied by a reduction in thyroid binding globulin (with associated decreases in T3 and increases in T3 resin uptake). The free T4 index was unaltered, which implies that thyroid function was unchanged. In addition, during fluoxymesterone administration, there was a reduction in testosterone, gonadotropins and LH response to LHRH. Basal TSH did not vary, but there was a reduction in the peak and integrated TSH response to TRH. PRL levels were unaltered during fluoxymesterone treatment.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

NOTES: This one is a bit different, as they also gave injections of LHRH. In this small group of subjects, Proviron didn't measurably change the response of LH and FSH (and ultimately testosterone) to LHRH after it had been taken at a medium dose for several weeks. Good to know.
____________________________________________________________


The following DO show suppression with Proviron use:


#6 : The effects of mesterolone, a male sex hormone in depressed patients (a double blind controlled study).
Abstract
Based on computer EEG (CEEG) profiles, in high doses, antidepressant properties of mesterolone, a synthetic androgen, were predicted. In a double-blind placebo controlled study, the clinical effects of 300-450 mg daily mesterolone were investigated in 52 relatively young (age range 26-53 years, mean 42.7 years) male depressed outpatients. During 6 weeks of mesterolone treatment, there was a significant improvement of depressive symptomatology. However, since an improvement was also established during the placebo treatment, no statistically appreciable difference in the therapeutic effects of mesterolone was established compared to placebo. Mesterolone treatment significantly decreased both plasma testosterone and protein bound testosterone levels. Patients with high testosterone levels prior to treatment seem to have had more benefit from mesterolone treatment than patients with low testosterone levels. The degree of improvement weakly correlated to the decrease of testosterone levels during mesterolone treatment.

NOTES: A decent sized group of middleaged men given 300-450 mg for several weeks. That's at least 2-3X the dose given in the studies above.
_____________________________________________________________

#7: The hormone response to a synthetic androgen (mesterolone) in oligospermia.
Abstract
Forty subfertile men with oligospermia were treated with a synthetic androgen (Mesterolone). The effect of the drug was evaluated by measuring serum testosterone, luteinizing hormone (LH), follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) and analysing the semen before and after treatment. The results demonstrated that in twenty-three patients treated for 6-9 months there was a significant decrease in serum testosterone (P less than 0.01); the means +/- SEM before and after treatment were 17.05 +/- 0.95 and 14.7 +/- 0.95 (nmol/l serum) respectively. There was a pronounced increase in serum LH (P less than 0.01), the values being 2.73 +/- 0.26 and 3.61 +/- 0.3 (u/l) respectively. However, no significant difference was found in serum FSH before and after treatment. The sperm concentration showed a variable response to treatment. In twenty-one patients there was either no change or worsening in the sperm concentration, whereas in nineteen patients an improvement was observed. The analysis of variance of sperm concentration and motility for the periods before and after treatment, for all the patients, showed no significant difference in the sperm concentration F1.145 = 2.82 (P=0.1).

NOTES: This group was treated for a long time, with testosterone decreasing, but again the dosage used is unknown. Considering the above, it's safe to assume they used high doses, like in #6. Strangely, LH is increased, but this may be due to its pulsatile nature, which makes it more difficult to measure precisely.
______________________________________________________________


CONCLUSION: Just looking at all the subjects in studies 1-4 you see a total of 358 ppl with normally functioning endorine systems take anywhere from 25-150 mg, sometimes for up to 12 months or more, with no measurable change in testosterone. Studies which showed otherwise used or were likely to have used very high doses. Low to medium doses (25-150 mg) of proviron taken when you're HPTA is fully functioning (read: not at the end of a cycle) does not significantly suppress testosterone. Higher doses however have a tendency to.
 
nice read... have a link to where you found it?...

All 7 studies I used were found on Pubmed; I didn't include links, so just search the name of the abstract and it will be there. The actual write-up is my invention. I posted it on some forum or another a few months ago but it generated zero conversation there.
 
All 7 studies I used were found on Pubmed; I didn't include links, so just search the name of the abstract and it will be there. The actual write-up is my invention. I posted it on some forum or another a few months ago but it generated zero conversation there.

that is because it is most likely far beyond most's comprehension and/or interests...
i do love proviron and may do a little expirament some day...
see if i can recover from trt while on it as a boost? what do you say... ive been on trt for a little over a year...
 
that is because it is most likely far beyond most's comprehension and/or interests...
i do love proviron and may do a little expirament some day...
see if i can recover from trt while on it as a boost? what do you say... ive been on trt for a little over a year...

Now I'm following. This is interesting
 
Now I'm following. This is interesting

i have a few goals still and am not sure thats something i want to attempt quite now...
its actually more affordable for me to run trt instead of cycles with pcts... maybe a sponsor is interested in a project with me...
i have good insurance and can get bloodwork... :artist:
 
that is because it is most likely far beyond most's comprehension and/or interests...
i do love proviron and may do a little expirament some day...
see if i can recover from trt while on it as a boost? what do you say... ive been on trt for a little over a year...

Why on earth would you want to recover from TRT?
 
I have used it by itself for 4 weeks at a time and my libido after i came off crashed and crashed hard. If i read the post correctly it had no affect on test levels but them what would explain my crash?
 
the problem is proviron by itself does nothing but harden you up. and when you stop it goes away.

stacking it with something anabolic like test or dbol and its awesome, but by itself?

I realize the substance does not have drastic effects for physique standalone (or much noticable effect at all, although I suppose this varies from person to person), but what it does of course have many other properties, namely libido, strength increase, and aggression. I'm interested mainly in the latter two. It may not seem much for someone who, let's say, regularly uses test, but for someone natural such as I, it seems a great deal given that the product does not suppress you, hence my interest in it. Certainly, I don't know why it does not receive more attention.

I have used it by itself for 4 weeks at a time and my libido after i came off crashed and crashed hard. If i read the post correctly it had no affect on test levels but them what would explain my crash?

You've told us very little and can't really expect a worthy answer in return. What were the exact details of you use? Did you use it after coming off of a ccyle as part of PCT? If not, are you certain your hormones were normal prior to use (no suppression/shutdown from past cycles)? Had you had libido problems prior? It certainly may have been estrogen rebound, or a host of other things.
 
I realize the substance does not have drastic effects for physique standalone (or much noticable effect at all, although I suppose this varies from person to person), but what it does of course have many other properties, namely libido, strength increase, and aggression. I'm interested mainly in the latter two. It may not seem much for someone who, let's say, regularly uses test, but for someone natural such as I, it seems a great deal given that the product does not suppress you, hence my interest in it. Certainly, I don't know why it does not receive more attention.

.

I don't buy at all that it doesn't suppress you. if something is put into your body which is androgenic then why wouldn't it suppress? the body is gonna notice a foreign androgen in the body and shut itself down.

in your case wanting to stay natural I would encourage you to run natty test boosters like hcgenerate, unleashed, etc. rather than run something androgenic.

i would never trust studies over science and personal experience.

you can try it out yourself by running legit proviron for lets say 6 weeks straight.. then run a blood test and see if your LH drops. that would be the only way to know for sure.. but I would bet on it would suppress you due to its androgenic properties. also another problem is it could be individually based meaning 10 guys try this experiment and 9 it suppresses and 1 it doesn't or vice versa. so the only way to know for sure is YOU to be your own guinea pig. and to add more flames to the fire with AAS use you might have 1 result in 2012 but a totally diffrent results in 2014 with the same experiment... and also different brands and different quality of AAS can make a heap of difference.
 
I don't buy at all that it doesn't suppress you. if something is put into your body which is androgenic then why wouldn't it suppress? the body is gonna notice a foreign androgen in the body and shut itself down.

in your case wanting to stay natural I would encourage you to run natty test boosters like hcgenerate, unleashed, etc. rather than run something androgenic.

i would never trust studies over science and personal experience.

you can try it out yourself by running legit proviron for lets say 6 weeks straight.. then run a blood test and see if your LH drops. that would be the only way to know for sure.. but I would bet on it would suppress you due to its androgenic properties. also another problem is it could be individually based meaning 10 guys try this experiment and 9 it suppresses and 1 it doesn't or vice versa. so the only way to know for sure is YOU to be your own guinea pig. and to add more flames to the fire with AAS use you might have 1 result in 2012 but a totally diffrent results in 2014 with the same experiment... and also different brands and different quality of AAS can make a heap of difference.

I agree with Steve here. Try it for yourself and get the bloods to back it up. You might be lucky and not experience suppression or you may be unlucky and experience it.
 
Bottom line -- proviron is mildly suppressive and obviously the higher the dosage and duration, the greater the suppression. This is why I believe it;'s a nice kicker and "finisher" to a cycle. (Quite frankly, in many ways it's better than SARMS in that regard). The effects can be enhanced by using UNLEASHED. Use the two together and your sex drive will be INSANE.
 
I don't buy at all that it doesn't suppress you. if something is put into your body which is androgenic then why wouldn't it suppress? the body is gonna notice a foreign androgen in the body and shut itself down.

in your case wanting to stay natural I would encourage you to run natty test boosters like hcgenerate, unleashed, etc. rather than run something androgenic.

i would never trust studies over science and personal experience.

you can try it out yourself by running legit proviron for lets say 6 weeks straight.. then run a blood test and see if your LH drops. that would be the only way to know for sure.. but I would bet on it would suppress you due to its androgenic properties. also another problem is it could be individually based meaning 10 guys try this experiment and 9 it suppresses and 1 it doesn't or vice versa. so the only way to know for sure is YOU to be your own guinea pig. and to add more flames to the fire with AAS use you might have 1 result in 2012 but a totally diffrent results in 2014 with the same experiment... and also different brands and different quality of AAS can make a heap of difference.

i agree with steve as well... its a steroid... its androgenic... it may not be nearly as suppressive as others but i find it hard to believe that there is no suppression at all but like steve said, its all speculation unless you try it and run the blood test... i absolutely love proviron though and think it is a wonderful addition to cycles...
 
It may not seem much for someone who, let's say, regularly uses test, but for someone natural such as I, it seems a great deal given that the product does not suppress you, hence my interest in it. Certainly, I don't know why it does not receive more attention

I don't buy at all that it doesn't suppress you. if something is put into your body which is androgenic then why wouldn't it suppress? the body is gonna notice a foreign androgen in the body and shut itself down.

sorry, I what I really meant was "does not suppress significantly enough to matter (or for the studies listed to detect significant changes and conclude no changes in test). If you'll read my conclusion in the original post it states this, as well as agreeing with you that it does suppress, just at the higher doses tested. As for why it would barely suppress at more reasonable doses, who knows? Maybe there are data out there explaining this that I haven't found. The point is, whether we know how it works or not, it has been demonstrated to work that way.

i would never trust studies over science and personal experience.

My friend, studies are a part of science.

in your case wanting to stay natural I would encourage you to run natty test boosters like hcgenerate, unleashed, etc. rather than run something androgenic.

Not a bad idea, of course, but here I usually prefer to go with more proven pharmaceutical test boosters such as clomid/toremifene, exemestane, etc. For someone who claims to trust science, however, I must ask: is there really alot more science supporting these supplements you recommended than there is supporting the mildness of proviron on the endocrine? Mind you, I barely know anything about supplemental so-called "test boosters", so maybe I'm speaking out of turn here and there is legitimate data on the products you mentioned.

also another problem is it could be individually based meaning 10 guys try this experiment and 9 it suppresses and 1 it doesn't or vice versa. so the only way to know for sure is YOU to be your own guinea pig.

Yes, this is true with any drug. Medicine is a statistical science. However with this substance, instead of 1 in 10 people, it would likely be less than 1 in 300, as that was about the total number of people in all the studies not showing suppression at 25-150 mg. But you do have a point. If I run it, I would probably run clomid or something similar throughout just to be extra careful.

Bottom line -- proviron is mildly suppressive and obviously the higher the dosage and duration, the greater the suppression.

Yep, this is pretty much it. Or, to put it more precisely, at dosages below 100-150 mg it is so mildly suppressive that the suppression can barely be detected by blood test if at all (hence studies 1-5), and doses going up to the 300's begin to become noticably suppressive.

i agree with steve as well... its a steroid... its androgenic... it may not be nearly as suppressive as others but i find it hard to believe that there is no suppression at all but like steve said, its all speculation unless you try it and run the blood test... i absolutely love proviron though and think it is a wonderful addition to cycles...

Yes, I also believe it's not completely devoid of suppression but then again I never claimed otherwise. See above. What I maintain (and what the studies maintain) is that suppression from doses ranging from 25 to about 150 mg per day is so miniscule as to be irrelevant from a practical viewpoint (if the changes in testosterone were not even considered statistically significant to the researchers then such changes certainly won't effect your phisique/well-being). It is of course entirely likely that some remarkably small suppression occurred in the subjects due to the feedback loop, in which any extra androgen is going to be sensed and hormonal output changed accordingly to some degree (depending on amount/type of angrogen, &c.)--it's just with this drug at these doses the degree of change is so tiny as to barely be called suppression at all in the practical sense.
 
you are best served going by personal experience of guys and being your own guinea pig.

as i stated above. it can make a major difference when you run UG vs. pharma grade. dosages can be wildly off. some guys can run 250mg of sustanon pharma grade and have better reactions then running a gram of UG stuff. newbs tend to be too obsessed with studies which is great, but in reality it doesn't do much of anything to depend on them to run successful cycles. its much more beneficial to listen to others personal experiences than go by studies. if its legit proviron then 50mg a day is ample. you don't need to even use 100mg a day.

as far as the supplement concern. it is well known that milk thistle helps cleanse the liver hence bodybuilders use it.. its been used for hundreds of years so this is nothing new. taurine helps reduce pumps, not something new but bodybuilders use it when running clen or AAS which give pumps.. hcgenerate has natural herbs which help stimulate the testes, if you run a cycle and your nuts turn to raisins then take some hcgenerate and watch them plump back up like magic. unleashed.. pop a few of those before a workout or sex and feel the difference in strength and stamina. you will know it works. these are easy to figure out if they work.. i've taken lots of supplements over the years and you will know pretty quickly which supps are bs and which actually work. if anything i wouldn't bother with studies with them, anyone can make a bullshit study and make an infomercial on tv and try to sell you a bs supplement, we see that all the time with 'diet pills' that are backed by doctors and studies. hence my point don't get caught up in studies because we do not know where it came from or what motivation there was to have that 'study' there were studies also that showed that cigarettes weren't harmful too, and docs would go on tv and say X brand was the brand to use.. you can find those ads on youtube. so no studies ARE NOT SCIENCE. studies are sponsored by an entity and you can run 100 studies and have 1 show what you want it to show and then publish that. the wine industry puts out studies showing red wine is good for the heart and people believe that too. alcohol good for you? really? but most people believe it.

as for your proviron thing go for it, however i am 99% sure you will have suppression. I wish we could take AAS and not suffer suppression, that would be wonderful, but its a pipe dream. the body will notice any foreign androgen or anabolic substance and start being suppressed. having said that you are right and I do not disagree that running proviron for a short time in bursts will have minimal effects on the HPTA. I just think you would be much more happy with your results running non suppressive legit supplements vs. fiddling around with proviron.

we can have this arguement all day. you could tell me "steve AAS will shrink your dick, prove to me in a study it doesn't" then how would i be able to disprove that? i couldn't... or a general statement like "steve AAS will kill you, its very dangerous and you will end up with brain cancer like that Raiders player and die a horrible death" there aren't studies on AAS proving one thing or another out there to really know..

however due to experience of myself and others with a lot of experience we can safely say without a shadow of a doubt thats not true. so my advice again is take advantage of HARDCORE boards like these and LISTEN to experienced guys, don't listen to what you read online or studies or media or your X gf or your friend at the gym who uses bb.com. THATS THE REAL SCIENCE.
 
Last edited:
just to add to what steve said... there is always a study somewhere that can or will counteract another study done that will provide conflicting answers and results... one of the main things with proviron is there is a lot of bunk shit that goes around... the true pharm grade proviron will do much more than the ug shit... and as steve said, if you get the good shit, there is no need to exceed 100 mg on it... i just got done taking pharm grade and dosed 50 for 4 of the 6 weeks and that definitely did the job... i bumped it the last two weeks and it was great but the point is that 50 was great as well... trying things on yourself is the only true way to know because we all respond differently... that's why there's so many fucking studies out there because they know that by testing different people, there will be different results, thus justifying their so called "theories"

I love the fact that there is a lot of research being done here and topics like these can be fun and interesting to talk about it...
 
I agree that personal experience trumps studies because what works for some people may not work for you and getting advice from other people like this forum is also helpful. I also agree that often times studies are sponsered by some enitity that has a financial stake but you can be biased an still be factually correct and relying om studies alone would be foolish but discounting ALL studies would be just as foolish.
 
stevesmi, I agree with much of what you said bro, but I believe you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. Yes, you will suffer suppression from proviron, no doubt, but at the doses of 25-100 or 150 mg, the suppression will me so minimal as to be insignificant (as shown by blood tests). I'm not disagreeing with the HPTA feedback model, which simply states that increased androgen/estrogen/progesterone will result downstream in decreased hormonal output. That's well established science. HOW MUCH will hormonal output be decreased? Well, it's not always a set amount and it will depend. With something like tren, complete shutdown of course. Anavar, severe suppression, or moderate, depending on dose, duration. Proviron, at the dose I mentioned, barely anything. Going up into the 300+ mg, and perhaps even 200, more severe suppresison. And yes, of course UG lab stuff should be avoided whenever possible--they don't test that stuff. It's evident that the studies apply only to pharma grade proviron, not UG proviron.

But I have to admit your position on science and studies in general, as well as on Unleashed/HCGenerate, puzzles me. On the one hand, you seem to be exhibiting great skepticism toward all scientific studies. Nothing necessarily wrong with that. But on the other hand, you recommend UCGenerate on the grounds that it makes your nuts "plump", and Unleashed on the grounds that you can "feel the difference". Am I reading you wrong here? I realize some studies have shady funding, are biased, &c, &c. But studies like that are usually studies on supplements funded by supp complanies, and are not peer reviewed. I get the impression overall that you are more skeptical of studies than you are of broscience, and would sooner believe some guys on the internet talking about how some supplement raises testosterone because their nuts grew to the size of golf balls and they ejaculated 50 ft, than peer reviewed literature, which according to you is not to be trusted at all beause it may be funded by the wrong people. Forgive me if I have it wrong, but it seems like this is what you're saying. No, as you said, studies are not science, and I never claimed that. I claimed studies were A PART of science, and an integral part of science. Without them, science wouldn't get very far and would have to rely on a bunch of bros murmuring on the internet about they can "feel" a supplement/drug working. :rolleyes: It really doesn't matter how good/experienced a person is, he simply cannot state much from personal experience other than his subjective feelings, which are, among other things: 1) subject to placebo effect, and 2) even if it isn't placebo, you often don't really know what it indicates (for example, is the increased libido from increased testosterone, or purely dopaminergic?). Most of the people I've known who were not newbies and have trained a while have taken this position more and more.

i've taken lots of supplements over the years and you will know pretty quickly which supps are bs and which actually work. if anything i wouldn't bother with studies with them, anyone can make a bullshit study and make an infomercial on tv and try to sell you a bs supplement, we see that all the time with 'diet pills' that are backed by doctors and studies. hence my point don't get caught up in studies because we do not know where it came from or what motivation there was to have that 'study' there were studies also that showed that cigarettes weren't harmful too, and docs would go on tv and say X brand was the brand to use.. you can find those ads on youtube

1) The only way you can know if a supplement that claims to alter certain chemicals in your body is bs or actually works is either from tests on yourself/people you trust, or from studies (preferably several peer reviewed studies, not just one or two shady ones--skepticism is of course warranted).

2) Given that the supplements you mention DO claim to make such alterations, you very well SHOULD bother with studies with them, either in journals or self-tested, especially if you rely on them for something as important as PCT. (Again, I'm not familiar with the ingredients, so bare with me.)

3) Infomercials have absolutely nothing to do with anything, I don't know why you even mention them. It's obvious that infomercials, supplements companies, and other such entities sometimes use studies that are either shady or not peer reviewed, or misinterpret/extrapolate way too much from legit studies (i.e., using in vitro studies to reach in vivo conslusions).

newbs tend to be too obsessed with studies which is great, but in reality it doesn't do much of anything to depend on them to run successful cycles. its much more beneficial to listen to others personal experiences than go by studies.

That's because studies that involve AAS do not use them in a bodybuilding-type environment, nor is their purpose to tell the lifter the best way to cycle whatever-drol for optium muscle gain and minimum shutdown. In this situation, we must take what we can from them, while--I agree--listening to the numerous experienced guys who've been doing them in the decades they have been around, studying the endocrine and the HPTA, &c. The purpose of the studies I presented though was not to prove anything about muscle building or how to cycle proviron, it was to directly demonstrate what sort of effect proviron had on the HPTA, whether it warranted cycling at all.

there aren't studies on AAS proving one thing or another out there to really know..

There is tons of peer reviewed literature out there on AAS proving many things.
 
Top Bottom