T Nation

Healthiest Cutting Cycle with Test E as a Base

I was thinking 600 to 700 Mg’s a week of test e, and a normal dosage of equipoise around 400 Mg’s a week. Im 210 6 feet tall and about 15 percent body fat. My goal is a healthy cutting/ bulking cycle with no methylated compounds. And ive done one real cycle of test e at 800 mg’s a week with winstrol about a year ago. I just want to burn the maximum amount of fat while getting big. The only other compounds i could think of was primobolan.

Oh and has anyone heard of elevated anxiety while taking equipoise more so than other anabolics.

[quote]Mad -scientist wrote:
I was thinking 600 to 700 Mg’s a week of test e, and a normal dosage of equipoise around 400 Mg’s a week. Im 210 6 feet tall and about 15 percent body fat. My goal is a healthy cutting/ bulking cycle with no methylated compounds. And ive done one real cycle of test e at 800 mg’s a week with winstrol about a year ago. I just want to burn the maximum amount of fat while getting big. The only other compounds i could think of was primobolan.

Oh and has anyone heard of elevated anxiety while taking equipoise more so than other anabolics.
[/quote]

Cutting and bulking are polar opposites lol…

What you are talking about is referred to as a recomp, or recomposition. Gaining SOME muscle size while losing fat.

Unless you are already a good deal overweight, this is a tough goal to accomplish, but not impossible.

Your calories will be the determining factor, not the gear. You could use deca and dbol and still cut up, you would just have to control the bloat.

On the other hand, EQ is actually not a good choice for leaning out, bc it drastically increases your appetite. I am a little over 2 weeks in of 600mg/week of EQ and am already feeling the hunger.

I had “panic attacks” at night, nightmares of being paralyzed from the neck down, or in a coma where I could hear but not doing anything else (it still baffles me that our modern society let people in that state in the name of bureaucracy and “preserving life” at any cost).

And yep, those happened while I was taking EQ. As I’ve never had such issues before, it could be coincidence, but I’m not tempting fate again. And as mentioned by ironmanzvw, EQ makes you hungry so not much of a help for cutting IMO.

[quote]Mad -scientist wrote:
My goal is a healthy cutting/ bulking cycle
[/quote]

Not to burst your bubble but the above statement seems like a bit of a misnomer to me. Gear use is generally considered unhealthy. . .am I missing something? Are you saying that smoking 2 cigarettes a day is better for you then 20? And sure this is true. . .but the real answer is "no cigarettes are best for you. . .lol. . .I love the bro logic on these boards.

Well i won’t be taking the EQ after hearing that. So I guess my best bet is to just watch my diet and try to control the bloating on whatever I’m taking. Is they’re any recommendation on a anabolic that is more prone to burning fat that’s not as toxic as tren or winstrol.

eq is amazing

lol i guess the only way for me to find out is to just do it

The EQ definitely jacks up my anxiety though, like big time

Lol Ok than i’m back to not taking it. This is a odd question but does the lump from test prop where you inject go down quicker than test e since the ester is absorbed quicker. Because I hear that test p gives less water retention than test e but i would hate injecting every damn day and having 10 fucking lumps on my body that aren’t going away. I can always start another post and ask i just figured this is quicker. And the people in here seemed knowledgeable.

Try the EQ, if you don’t like it stop, but its up to you. I have one friend that loves EQ while another one of my friends doesn’t.

I’ve used both prop and E and never had a lump from either.

[quote]T-Fal wrote:

[quote]Mad -scientist wrote:
My goal is a healthy cutting/ bulking cycle
[/quote]

Not to burst your bubble but the above statement seems like a bit of a misnomer to me. Gear use is generally considered unhealthy. . .am I missing something? Are you saying that smoking 2 cigarettes a day is better for you then 20? And sure this is true. . .but the real answer is "no cigarettes are best for you. . .lol. . .I love the bro logic on these boards. [/quote]

He means a cycle without the use of methylated substances, like he said. A cycle without orals will obviously be less likely to cause damage than one with.

THANK YOU! lol im glad some one knew what i ment