T Nation

Possible Cut Cycle

Howdy y’all, still on my bulk cycle but wanted to get feedback on a future cut cycle I’m thinking about. Current cycle:

250mg test e (trt dose)
400mg deca
200ish mast e

I’m on week 6 of 16

Calorie surplus of 500 on non cardio day’s and 650 on cardio days. Hoping to gain the least amount of fat possible.

Future cut cycle:

500mg test e weeks 1-16
100mg anavar weeks 1-8
100mg proviron weeks 1-16

A deficit of 500 to start and bump to 1k when body adapts. Trying to preserve as much muscle as possible.

Critiques, comments, concerns with the cut stack?
Any feed back welcome.

Cut on trt and anavar alone and you’ll be more than pleased. Unless you’re doing show prep that’s more than enough for us mere mortals.

2 Likes

So iron you recommending:
250mg test e
100mg anavar?

If that’s the case how long would you run the var at that dose? I have like an assload of 25mg dosed var tabs. Tested and verified for quality.

I don’t think you even need to go that high. 50mg will do the job of retaining muscle and strength during a calorie deficit. At that dose you can run it at least six weeks. If you get wrecked lipids from var (I don’t, but I seem to be an outlier) then six weeks is probably the max.

1 Like

Honestly I’ve been on mast e forever now and my HDL is slightly low and LDL is high but total cholesterol is normal so are my triglycerides. From everything my family doctor told me HDL and LDL are still not proven to cause issues. But to watch total cholesterol and triglycerides. What are your thoughts @iron_yuppie

Should be noted total cholesterol is irrelevant if HDL is low and LDL is high. One can have an HDL fo 4, LDL of 80, still have normal total cholesterol (or even in the designated optimal bracket)… but given they’re HDL/LDL ratio, overall lack of protection from lipid oxidation etc they’re still at immense risk regarding atherogenesis.

LDL absolutely induces issues when elevated over prolonged periods of time, particle sizes, other lipid parameters (apolipoproteins) also come into play… given HDL is known as the “good”, “cardioprotective” cholesterol you’d think it’d be relevant.

If you’ve got an HDL of 65, LDL of 160, you’re HDL/LDL ratio is fine, whilst even very high levels of HDL may be linked in relation to an elevated risk regarding cardiovascular disease… the risk is minimal, and such a ratio would still elict an element of cardioprotection despite high LDL… it’s all about the ratio, particle sizes and triglycerides.

Are you sure you’re doctor said HDL/LDL doesn’t matter? That’s an incredibly ignorant and potentially dangerous thing to tell a patient (in my opinion)

If LDL wasn’t proven to cause issues, men with severe familial hypercholesterolemia wouldn’t die in their 20’s/30’s, many large meta analysis wouldn’t have come to the conclusion regarding elevated cholesterol inducing premature death

There are ways to mitigate risk even with sub-par cholesterol, a bad HDL/LDL ratio doesn’t neseccarily equate to increased lipid oxidation/plaque build up. A healthy diet, antioxidant supplementation, regular exercise can go a long way (unless you’ve got severe inherited ailment regarding cholesterol management… then see a doc, get it sorted)

1 Like

@unreal24278 yes the few doctors here in the states I’ve had are genuinely not concerned with LDL/HDL ratios the are in fact more worried about triglycerides beings that in itself is the fatty particle that cause build up that “HDL” is supposed to remove. No of all of the above and total cholesterol is high they worry. But with our diets (well most of us) that eat clean artery blockage is just not there. The only way my doc would give me medication is if triglycerides and total cholesterol is high. Regardless of were HDL and LDL is.

This would be malpractice, if you were on say

test
winny
primo

and you’re HDL was 4, you’re HDL was 120, you’d NEED a statin if said side effect wasn’t transient (which it is). With anabolic steroids, the notion of a healthy diet, lifestyle etc saving you is pretty much out the window… Will it help? Yes, a LOT, but it won’t stop plaque from building up, especially if you’re susceptible. AAS induce a net vasoconstrictive, promote lipid periodisation through varying mechanisms absent of even altering lipid profiles, couple this with the fact many AAS can trash you’re lipids.

Total cholesterol is only dangerous dependent on the situation

  • High LDL, Low HDL and high trigs is a long term disaster waiting to unfold
  • High HDL, low/normal LDL and normal/low triglycerides but high total cholesterol isn’t very worrying

@unreal24278 these are my last labs and like I said the doc is unconcerned.

My family doctor takes a more liberal view… you on the other hand are all textbook lol.

1 Like

How much mast are you on… I can link data to you right now indicating that going with this year round increases you’re risk of CVD, it’s not terrible though, given you’re LDL isn’t particularly elevated… however certain parameters (apolipoproteins, particle sizes etc) aren’t measured here, thus one can only go by “those ratios are off, HDL is low, it’s an independent risk factor for CVD”.

It’s less “textbook” and more “literally all data preaches this is dangerous to run around with long term”

1 Like

Currently I’m on 400mg mast e… after the blast I normally drop it down to 150ish during my cruise. Let’s explore another thing, why do folks with low cholesterol have heart attacks then?

Because HDL itself is cardioprotective, prevents lipid oxidation… LDL promotes it, thus even with say lower total cholesterol but INCREDIBLY low HDL, there is very little in the way of that protection, so even low total cholesterol can induce harm… it’s more than just about how high the total number is.

Other factors that relate are

  • systemic inflammation
  • diet/lifestyle
  • genetics

etc

The role in increasing HDL artificially and overall rates of CVD remains to be of unknown significance however… but low levels are well known to be a strong risk factor independent of LDL, total cholesterol etc

What’s your take on mine, would you say that mine is dangerously high and I should stop mast or would you say mine is moderately high without a cause for alarm. Which really wouldn’t matter if I stopped mast because I’m on Deca and that’s a lipid killer to. I also have no family history of high cholesterol cholesterol related heart attacks and or death

low HDL whilst an independent risk factor isn’t as bad as low HDL, high LDL and triglycerides… though this is also dependent on ratios… an HDL of 4 but an LDL of 120 is just as bad as high LDL… however triglycerides/ out of whack ratios and/or high LDL exacerbate the risk factor initiated from low HDL

I think it’s you’re decision, the lipid related effects are transient, they go away once you stop using

It isn’t, at least not regarding low dosages of 100mg weekly. Numerous mechanisms will determine how badly a hormone effects cholesterol

  • can it aromatise (oestrogen aids regarding lipid metabolism)
  • is it hepatotoxic
  • what’s the dosage taken
    Mast is far more likely to crush lipids compared to nandrolone

Well personally I will be giving Mast e A break. I’m on week 6 of 16 on my current cycle. Once the cycle is done I plan on coming off everything except for my TRT Dose of test e For probably quite some time. Well at least three months, then I plan on doing the cut cycle listed above. I’m not sure if Var Is bad on lipids is mast but that’ll be the next lipid wrecker that I’ll be taking.

Var is like 10x worse for most

1 Like

@unreal24278
Say you take Anavar and it effects lipids negatively for a short time and they bounce back is there any negative effects from that? Like if it’s just a short time that lipids are wrecked.

Once… probably not, still not healthy. Also induces a state of hyper coagulation, meaning if prone/underlying CVD is present you could stroke out/die of a myocardial infarction

Repeatedly, yes

Your levels aren’t bad enough to warrant medication for it, but that doesn’t mean LDL and HDL aren’t of concern. Normal primary care physicians severely under play cholesterol.

I have FH, well documented since age 13 (LDL 268 HDL 40 Tri 70). My doctor said nothing to worry about until I’m 40, as it’s just genetic high cholesterol

Come to find out, I NEED to be on statins. Many lipid specialists in fact prescribe statins for kids as young as 10 YEARS OLD due to the dangers of FH.

I’ve had 3 PCP doctors over the last 20 years all tell me not to worry about it.

Your levels aren’t all that bad, and if you dropped down to just TRT, they’d probably improve.

1 Like