I see a lot of people getting slammed for oral only cycles and have wondered why.
Many here agree that adding a oral kick start to an IM cycle is a good idea. It allows you to make quicker gains due to the orals shorter half-life.
This idea seems independent of the synergy between the receptor and non-receptor mediated effects of certain steroids, i.e. class 1/class 2 ala Bill Roberts.
Do oral steroids work less well when used on their own? Are orals somehow magically made more effective when combined with an IM? They shouldn’t. It’s not a case of 1+1=3.
If orals were less effective then I would think they should never be used. For a testosterone enanthate IM cycle, a proper kick start should be a compound with no or shorter ester like suspension, acetate, or propionate.
The reason oral cycles don’t give as much gains most of the time I think is;
They are used by less knowledgeable people, who generally do not use PCT, therefore losing most of their gains afterwards.
They use lower dosages. i.e. 50mg Dianabol per day is only 350mg per week compared to many 1000mg per week IM cycles people use.
They aren’t on long enough due to liver safety. You aren’t going to get as many gains over 4-6 weeks, than you are on a 12 week IM cycle.
Some orals are harder on the liver. Ever a short period of 4 weeks can screw up liver values. The blood levels from an oral only cycle yo yo up and down increasing your chances of side effects (gyno acne etc.) Also 50mg ed of dbol isn’t a low dose if you have real dbol thats dosed correctly. If you do an oral only cycle, I’d just use Anivar.
[quote]Hagar wrote:
Some orals are harder on the liver. Ever a short period of 4 weeks can screw up liver values. The blood levels from an oral only cycle yo yo up and down increasing your chances of side effects (gyno acne etc.) Also 50mg ed of dbol isn’t a low dose if you have real dbol thats dosed correctly. If you do an oral only cycle, I’d just use Anivar. [/quote]
I am assuming people are dosing their orals multiple times per day.
I agree, 50mg of Dianabol isn’t a low dosage, but it is low compared to most IM cycles.
[quote]Dopamineloveaffa wrote:
Hagar wrote:
Some orals are harder on the liver. Ever a short period of 4 weeks can screw up liver values. The blood levels from an oral only cycle yo yo up and down increasing your chances of side effects (gyno acne etc.) Also 50mg ed of dbol isn’t a low dose if you have real dbol thats dosed correctly. If you do an oral only cycle, I’d just use Anivar.
I am assuming people are dosing their orals multiple times per day.
I agree, 50mg of Dianabol isn’t a low dosage, but it is low compared to most IM cycles.[/quote]
Yes but even then their not to stable. What about at night when you sleep? Thing is most guys don’t keep much of their gains from oral only cycles but I have to admit I’ve made some good progress with prohormone cycles which are oral only.
I’m personally going to give up orals except for maybe some anivar. I just worry about my liver. Ever notice your appetite decrease on dbol or anadrol? That is a sign your liver is stressed. When I hear of guys getting surgery on their liver, I start wondering about my own health. If you go this wrought, I suggest getting blood work done.
I think a lot of the “liver argument” is over-stated a little. Yes, orals will fuck with your lab values, but probably no worse than a couple of days of heavy boozing would. Most people do that several times during their lives and suffer no long term effects. The liver is a very resilient organ, just give it resting time.
[quote]jamma wrote:
I think a lot of the “liver argument” is over-stated a little. Yes, orals will fuck with your lab values, but probably no worse than a couple of days of heavy boozing would. Most people do that several times during their lives and suffer no long term effects. The liver is a very resilient organ, just give it resting time.
[/quote]
I’ve heard this view before but still its best to be cautious. I’ve read too many posts of guys who’s liver values are screwed up to take the risks lightly.
Nothing is wrong per se with orals. I love dbol. I also totally agree that liver toxicity is an overblown “problem.” But thats another argument.
Basically if you are looking for a good cycle you want/need injectables because if you rank all gear in terms of effectiveness and reasons for use the injectables make their way to the top.
Test is king.
Tren is unrivaled.
Sure I will give you that picking between drol and dbol you have a respectable oral for gaining size and strength but it vanishes once you stop if you aren’t taking test.
Var is crazy expensive. Winny better as an injectable.
Nothing compares to Deca, Masteron and EQ in oral form.
The bottom line IMO is people asking about orals only are simply afraid of needles. If you are going to do it, do it right and conquer that fear.
[quote]jamma wrote:
I think a lot of the “liver argument” is over-stated a little. Yes, orals will fuck with your lab values, but probably no worse than a couple of days of heavy boozing would. Most people do that several times during their lives and suffer no long term effects. The liver is a very resilient organ, just give it resting time.
[/quote]
Not true - a couple of days boozing for a full 6 weeks is more like it… plus if you drink on top of that.
Most people come into problems with halo and mixing orals rather than one ran for 6 weeks. I am sure Dbol run 5x a week could be run for 8 weeks or so.
The argument that orals dont give as good gains due to only being 6 week cycles is bollocks too.
On Cyp, one will gain from week 5-10 or so that is 5 weeks… with orals due to the halflife, the gains start alot sooner say week 2-6, maybe 3-6. Just a different time of action - like the difference in action of prop to Enanth. No?
Why do people claim that gains made from orals will be any less lasting than gains made from an injectible? Muscle is muscle right?
What is the logic?
I am not talking about watergain.
Say if I were to use anadrol 100mg ED, winstrol 50mg ED and dbol 40mg ED for 6 weeks, I would surely gain some muscle?
Of course if I should die from liver cancer in week 7 that would be kinda bad, but if I didn’t? Any reason the actual muscle gains would disappear after the 6 weeks (given let’s say a 4-week SERM based PCT)?
Just doesn’t make any sense to me. I am not arguing test wouldn’t be safer and less unhealthy, but muscle gained is muscle gained I would think.
[quote]balisong wrote:
Why do people claim that gains made from orals will be any less lasting than gains made from an injectible? Muscle is muscle right?
What is the logic?
I am not talking about watergain.
[/quote]
But the main reason is water retention. Dbol and anadrol will cause very rapid increases in size and strength but a lot of that new mass is water. Hence the smooth puffy appearance many get while on dbol or drol. That water weight is the first to go once the drug is discontinued. The higher the quality of new mass put on during a cycle the easier it is to maintain and keep the majority of those gains.
I’m not saying that 0 can be gained from an oral only cycle. Oral only cycles that incorporate a class I/II synergy are of some use. But generally speaking a mix between an oral and injectable would yield the greatest amounts of maintainable mass.
In my opinion, no real fact behind this, half life / ester is the problem posed with oral only cycles.
Water retention is partly to blame for the poor retention of gains post cycle but the time a steroids id in your system for i believe makes the difference.
For example - Guy A uses 400mg of testosterone enanthate per week for 12 weeks.
He gains 20lbs of lean muscle weight with minimal water retention (he is using a smattering of adex of course) His body has had constant stable levels of TESTOSTERONE for 12 weeks, they have been somewhat higher than normal but they have remained stable, his muscles have become used to their new size and each fibre is expanded and not soaked in water.
Guy B uses Dianabol @ 50mg a day for 6 weeks, he tries to keep a stable blood level, but due to dianabol only being active in his system for 4 hours, his blood levels are all over the place at night and he wakes up with a limp dick everyday. He then begins flooding his sytem with dianabol again, his muscles hold onto excess fluid and the fibres expand slightly as they recover from his more intensified training sessions.
When Guy B comes off dianabol he uses some crappy clomid for 3 weeks and cries like a little girl while he watches titanic every night. His muscles no longer holding onto the water they were while on cycle begin to shrink and following that the fibres also as they dont have to accomodate the water.
Ok, so that isnt entirely accurate or physiologically correct in all points, and ignore the smatterings of silly attempts at humour in there but i think the point is, a longer estered steroid which is in the body for a porlonged period of time - especially a steroid which is say a clone of the one we priduce anyway, will produce better, long term more keepable muscular improvements than a short lived pill.
How about a “base” of turanabol, say 40mg ED split up in four 10 mg doses: One first thing in the morning, one at abot 3 pm, another one before bedtime, and the last one at night. Tbol has a halflife of about 16 hours I think?
Then add 30mg of dbol in 5mg doses split evenly throughout the day.
Maybe top it off with anadrol at 100mg split in four doses too (one of them at night with the tbol).
Should keep fairly elevated levels at all times I would think. A bit of a pain to keep track of all the pills, but IF one was to do this, there would be growth yes? (No, I don’t mean liver-cancer growth).
[quote]bushidobadboy wrote:
I find this whole thread puzzling, since the answer seems so obvious to me, that I can’t figure out why no one else has mentioned it. I mean I thought it was ‘written in stone’, so to speak.
Most orals are class II, and the only ones that are class I are hellish expensive and are run at low doses.
Class II steroids do not stimulate the nuclei of a muscle fiber to transcript more DNA and therefore make more protein to enlarge the fiber.
Class II steroids simply pump you up and/or potentiate the nervous system for quick strength gains. All this does is facilitate more intense training sessions, but doesn’t directly hypertrophy the muscles.
Only a class I steroid will increase the amount of structural proteins in the muscle fiber.
Oh, and yes 1 + 1 = 3 when you talk about the fabled synergistic stack. Adding a class I to a class II, howecver, only once the class I has become active in your system, which is why the ‘oral kickstart’ should be kicked to the curb, IMO. Unless of course you really are that impatient, lol.
Bushy[/quote]
Trust bushy to come in and pwn everyone. Where do you find the class of the steroid?
hm, bushido are you saying that class I steroids are anabolic, whereas class II are only androgenic? How does a class II steroid “pump you up”?? by what mechanism?
I thought dbol was a class II, but from what I’ve read it greatly increases muscleprotein synthesis.
I also read somewhere (can’t rememeber where) that the class I and class II classifiactions are grossly oversimplified and says next to nothing about how much muscle a steroid can “produce”.
This is all very confusing.
Too many experts saying the opposite of each other.
“dbol is just watergain” says one.
“gained 30 pounds of muscle from dbol and kept all of it” says another… oh well.