Ksmans advice has me taking my temperature anally 4 times a day and consuming 1lb of iodized salt a day. Glad I didnt take that advice, I dont get down with the butt stuff.
I wonder how much of Ksmans stuff was plagiarized or just re-worded from somewhere else.
I also wonder how much different of a place this would be if Physio didnt claim to be a Doc but just well educated on this area. His advice helped a lot of people and he did seem knowledgeable.
@newbvet
I personally put a Bluetooth thermometer up my ass and leave it there. I get readings on my phone every 15 secs. Ksman’s info wasn’t that much different than other forums. He just made it sound more legit. He put so much time into his posts that you thought he had to have the answer especially when you’re desperate. That’s how it was for me at least. Physio basically just said to stop doing stupid shit that isn’t needed. Going back and reading it now his info wasn’t profound it was just getting in the different mindset of letting the body regulate itself which is hard when you are subscribed to the philosophy that you need to control everything.
I think you are oversimplifying what I was suggesting.
I haven’t followed everything that has been going down on these forums, whether it be recently or a while ago. I respect that perhaps there is a lot of misinformation on these forums - that said I would like someone to shed light on this E2 management matter. I’ve always run .5 - 1mg a week of adex on my cycles, not to keep usual symptoms at bay (of which rarely affect me that much), but rather because I was always under the impression that E2 affected how much you got out of your test. Granted I know it is never a good idea to crash your E2, especially due to inevitable rebounds when you come off. But then, in your opinion, where do AI’s have their place?
I believe you but lets be honest about why you put that up there to begin with… 
The thrust feature helps with the reading.
If you don’t get sides from high E2, no need to treat a number. There’s several benefits to higher E2 which have been listed above.
The “you need an AI” is an old school train of thought which has been proven to not be true. Plenty of guys are running cycles successfully now without the addition and risk or another compound that can be harsh on lipids, crash estrogen, and so on.
You said it pretty simple.
Do the complete opposite. The body tries to keep an optimal ratio of hormones. More T so the body creates more E for a reason. When you get to 1000mg/week then you are putting the body at levels it may not be able to handle without an AI.
Quoting that dipshit quack is a one way ticket to being ignored. Might as well tell me a psychic is an accurate way to play lottery numbers.
Just saying.
OR
Well I’ll be damned.
I would appeal the second lottery case… No way am I sharing that. I may leave the country to avoid sharing almost 900K.
England is going to get 60% of that minimum.
I think lottery winnings are tax exempt
Why do guys like and recommend keeping e2 near TRT levels when on compounds that don’t aromatize (think low test-high tren cycles) , but keeping it near TRT levels when you are on a higher level of test is a no-no? Is it a simple of matter of having to introduce an AI? Seems like the recommendation is don’t keep e2 levels low when on high test, but also do low test cycles and keep e2 low necessarily.
Inherently the properties of these compounds differ… however it’s a good point, and the answer is… non-aromatising compounds are generally harsher on youre lipids etc
The induction of an aromatise inhibitor itself has the potential to facilitate numerous problems down the line, esp considering just how easy it is to bottom out estradiol on AI’s. It’s just not nesseccary in the majority of cases and tend to cause more issues then they solve
If you want to use non aromatising anabolics, go ahead… that’s fine… but the notion between “why is this okay”, it is okay, as is using aromatising AAS, but the notion of an AI is typically unwarranted