Brook, thanks a million man.
Never intended to hijack the thread, as about 90 percent of the post was topical. (I thought so anyway:))
Apologies to the OP if I did.
Anyway, thanks so much for all the advice you give on this site, it’s really appreciated.
Think I will start another thread, might be useful?
If you feel you need more input mate - yep.
[quote] Brook wrote:
Deca truly has a sweet spot at 2mg/lb of bodyweight - so if you weight 200lbs then 400mg/wk is a good dosage. I have quite some experience with the drug and find this to be the case in myself and others who use the protocol.
[/quote]
Brook,
Slight hijack, but it’s interesting that you mention that 2mg deca “sweet spot”. I know that one or more steroid researchers have written that previously, and I paused and thought about mentioning that in my reply to you yesterday in the S4 thread when I clarified my statement about increased dosages of AAS as users become more experienced and their muscles go through AAS-mediated hyperplasia etc…
I didn’t say anything though, because I was primarily writing about Test. Still, my gut feeling is that the 2mg/lb/wk rule really comes about from common sense… and growth of the user over time and relationship to other (Test etc…) stacked doses, and that the numbers just happen to work out in a way that lets us simplify them. Just my sense of things… I’m sure that you could make a pretty good argument for your side. We’d probably need to run double-blind cycles using twins and accurately dosed, human grade gear in order to draw firm conclusions 
Sorry for the diversion, OP.
[quote]whotookmyname wrote:
Brook wrote:
Deca truly has a sweet spot at 2mg/lb of bodyweight - so if you weight 200lbs then 400mg/wk is a good dosage. I have quite some experience with the drug and find this to be the case in myself and others who use the protocol.
Brook,
Slight hijack, but it’s interesting that you mention that 2mg deca “sweet spot”. I know that one or more steroid researchers have written that previously, and I paused and thought about mentioning that in my reply to you yesterday in the S4 thread when I clarified my statement about increased dosages of AAS as users become more experienced and their muscles go through AAS-mediated hyperplasia etc…
I didn’t say anything though, because I was primarily writing about Test. Still, my gut feeling is that the 2mg/lb/wk rule really comes about from common sense… and growth of the user over time and relationship to other (Test etc…) stacked doses, and that the numbers just happen to work out in a way that lets us simplify them. Just my sense of things… I’m sure that you could make a pretty good argument for your side. We’d probably need to run double-blind cycles using twins and accurately dosed, human grade gear in order to draw firm conclusions
Sorry for the diversion, OP.[/quote]
I think this thread is fairly dead anyway now…!
You know, i wrote a page or so about the exact same thing today in reply to that thread, yet i didnt post it as i had no answers - only questions!
What i was going to say was similar to the following: I know that Deca is one of the only steroids that bodybuilders (et al) use a side:benefit chart for; 2mg/lb - and this has always been a great dose for me and apparently others - and the one time i went over that (using 5-600mg E6D) i found more sides (gyno and aggression surprisingly) but no noticeable further gains…
If this is the case for this drug - then why not the others, i bet in medical settings for non-TRT purposes (muscle wasting diseases being the main indication as far as i know) they use AAS by bodyweight… but there are not many AAS used in medicine these days, with Test and Deca being staples AFAIK.
I know that for TRT there is no need to measure ever increasing dosages seeing as size is not directly related to testosterone secretion, and 100mg/wk will give any man a high/normal TRT level.
BUT for the purposes of muscle building (having used Human Grade Deca i have read the insert and it concentrates on its great protein synthesis and actually mentions the 2mg/lb dose too. There are a few indications for the drug, cancers, lupus, HIV and others… IIRC it mentions the suppression, water weight… this is from memory from years back, but i bet there is a PDF of one online easily found) higher than natty level dosages of the steroid hormone are going to be warranted to get maximum protein synthesis.
This is all i have! 
Brook
[quote] Brook wrote:
If this is the case for this drug - then why not the others, i bet in medical settings for non-TRT purposes (muscle wasting diseases being the main indication as far as i know) they use AAS by bodyweight…
[/quote]
In the deca studies that I’ve glanced at, the researchers typically consider therapeutic doses to be 50-100mg/wk, occasionally 200mg and sometimes (depending on the particular affliction and age of patients) as low as 25mg.
I haven’t come across any attempts to divvy up the dose according to patient weight. Too often that seems to be the way medicine is still practiced though… doses are generally tweaked for infants, and occasionally kids and seniors. Maybe things are getting a bit better. Not that I’m saying that I’m convinced that there’s a strict bodyweight / dose relationship with deca
Fwiw, I’ve only come across one or two studies that delve into “misuse” and “supraphysiological levels”. They pretty much conclude that 200 mg doesn’t cut it and that 300 mg is probably the min dose for improved strength and size.
[quote] Brook wrote:
BUT for the purposes of muscle building (having used Human Grade Deca i have read the insert and it concentrates on its great protein synthesis and actually mentions the 2mg/lb dose too.
Brook[/quote]
Granted it was years back, but do you know if this insert was something actually printed by a legitimate pharm company that produced the product? Like an Organon? Or are we talking about something like a BD insert?
[quote]whotookmyname wrote:
Brook wrote:
If this is the case for this drug - then why not the others, i bet in medical settings for non-TRT purposes (muscle wasting diseases being the main indication as far as i know) they use AAS by bodyweight…
In the deca studies that I’ve glanced at, the researchers typically consider therapeutic doses to be 50-100mg/wk, occasionally 200mg and sometimes (depending on the particular affliction and age of patients) as low as 25mg.
I haven’t come across any attempts to divvy up the dose according to patient weight. Too often that seems to be the way medicine is still practiced though… doses are generally tweaked for infants, and occasionally kids and seniors. Maybe things are getting a bit better. Not that I’m saying that I’m convinced that there’s a strict bodyweight / dose relationship with deca
Fwiw, I’ve only come across one or two studies that delve into “misuse” and “supraphysiological levels”. They pretty much conclude that 200 mg doesn’t cut it and that 300 mg is probably the min dose for improved strength and size.
Brook wrote:
BUT for the purposes of muscle building (having used Human Grade Deca i have read the insert and it concentrates on its great protein synthesis and actually mentions the 2mg/lb dose too.
Brook
Granted it was years back, but do you know if this insert was something actually printed by a legitimate pharm company that produced the product? Like an Organon? Or are we talking about something like a BD insert?
[/quote]
Yea legit - both Norma and Organon. It was BECAUSE it was years ago this was the case… back then i never used to get BD injects… everything was in single use vials and amps and HG and expensive too!
Brook
Hey guys you all are great.
Even Iam doing a 500mg 2X week cycle for Sust. and will start the PCT after 3 weeks(Correction required if wrong) and will be using Nolva for the same…Reply requestedddd…
Thanx