T Nation

Test E + Primo + Masteron

Test e 500mg
Primo 700mg
Masteron prop 300mg

Whats the thoughts of this cycle guys? Will be hrash for hair? Would you put ai in cycle like this?

Or would be better go like this - >test e 750mg
Primo 700mg?

What would be best of the goal is to be very lean and high sex drive?

If you’re asking this question, do you need 1.5g of gear a week? The compounds are sensible enough with your goals, but I’d arrange the numbers quite differently for it. What have you used in the past (which drugs and at what dose) and how has it affected you? Is your hair thinning now or have any drugs effected it before? How big are you, where are your lifts at, how old are you?

Mast seems redundant with primo in there. Unless you’re trying to get dick skin thin it’s hard to justify 1g of DHT derivatives.


I ve used everything, i blast and cruise last 4 years im not pro but won many amateur contests, im close to pro level, i ve run test to 2grams tren ace to 1000mg, my hair is thinner than past but i ve all hair just not so thick as before start abuse, i use saw palmetto and nizoral for hair protect, main goal is sex drive of this cycle, is it look good? Is better not use an ai right?

Ps im 29 years old, use gear from 18, last 4 years blast and cruise

To be honest i want the libido gains of mast just hope not to be fatal for my hair this combination

Gotcha. I mean, it comes down to genetics and your body’s response to the compound. I suppose if it looks like it’s going to be bad you can bail on the mast and just continue otherwise uninterrupted.

Yes mate im gonna try it and see how it ll be, anyways usually even i lost amount of hair on some heavy blasts after while cruise they come back after while

This is the usual brad pitt lean kind of gains style. Looks good.

Guys if add some dbol im the cycle 30mg how much adex you would use in this cycle
Test 600mg
Primo 700mg
Masteron 300mg
Dbol 40mg

3x 0,25mg arimidex per week ll be ok? I prefer drive estro little high than crash them

And need help with this what you suggest?
I finished the following cycle,

Test e 750mg
Tren ace 300mg
I did 6 weeks on

I was plan to jump on test e 750mg
Primo 700mg
Masteron 300mg
Dbol 40mg and go for 20 weeks and then do the cruise, would be better go direct for the 20 weeks like planed or i take a cruise now 3 weeks 125mg test 5000hcg per week and then jump to the primo mast dbol? What you would do? I want do what would be best to not ve sexual issues the next months

No reason to cruise for three weeks. That’s almost work than just going 26 weeks straight (which is also not ideal but it’s your body).

Take the AI if you need it, and on that much test and dbol you certainly will. Start lower and add if necessary, but don’t go too crazy. You’d be better off taking less AI and less dbol than fighting to try to balance the two out for weeks at a time.

Thanks a lot for your answer mate, the dbol ll not add yet decided next month to do so may i ll need little ai i already ve on hand, would you suggest for those stuff start just some nolva and not ai at all? Ot use the ai im case i see i need?

Before running another cycle, what were the results of your cardiac evaluation?

If you’ve got HCM/DCM (hereditary and/or drug induced) running another cycle would be seriously ill advised


Aorta: The visualized thoracic aorta is unremarkable.

Pulmonary artery: The main pulmonary artery is normal in size.

Systemic and pulmonary venous return: Conventional.

Cardiac Chambers: The cardiac chambers demonstrate normal atrioventricular and ventriculoarterial concordance.

Coronaries: Not specifically imaged.

Left Ventricle: The left ventricular size is severely enlarged. The left ventricular systolic function is globally normal. No segmental wall motion abnormalities are seen. There is mild symmetric, concentric left ventricular hypertrophy throughout the left ventricle. T2-weighted imaging demonstrates no high signal intensity to suggest the presence of myocardial edema. Post contrast images demonstrate no myocardial delayed enhancement. No thrombus is seen in the left ventricle.

Absolute Indexed to BSA, height: 183 cm weight: 91 kg, Mosteller BSA method .
LVEDV: 299 mL LVEDVI: 139 mL/m2; (normal 57-105, mildly Increased 106-117, moderately increased 118-129, severely increased >129 ml/m2)*
LVESV: 125 mL LVESVI: 58 mL/m2
LVSV: 174 mL LVSVI: 81 mL/m2
LVEF: 58 %; (normal 57-77%, mildly depressed 41-56, moderately depressed 30-40, severely depressed less than 30%)
EDD: 54 mm (normal < 62)
ESD: 40 mm
LV mass: 189 g; LV mass indexed: 88 g/m2, (mildly increased 80-99 g/m2). LV mass quantification exclude the papillary muscles.

Basal anterior: 7.1mm
Basal anteroseptal: 11.0mm
Basal inferoseptal: 10.2mm
Basal inferior: 8.6mm
Basal inferolateral: 10.5mm
Basal anterolateral: 6.5mm

Mid anterior: 7.7mm
Mid anteroseptal: 10.0mm
Mid inferoseptal: 10.4mm
Mid inferior: 8.0mm
Mid inferolateral: 9.1mm
Mid anterolateral: 5.0mm

Apical anterior: 4.5mm
Apical septal: 4.3mm
Apical inferior: 4.3mm
Apical lateral: 4.0mm

Cardiac output: 10.5 l/min; Cardiac index: 5 l/min/m2

Right Ventricle: The right ventricular size is moderately enlarged. The right systolic ventricular function is globally normal. No segmental wall motion abnormalities or aneurysms are seen. Post contrast images demonstrate no myocardial delayed enhancement. No thrombus is seen in the right ventricle.

Absolute Indexed to BSA
RVEDV: 322 mL RVEDVI: 150 mL/m2 (normal= 61-121, mildly increased 122-136, moderately increased 137-151, severely increased greater than 151 ml/m2).*
RVESV: 152 mL RVESVI: 71 mL/m2
RVSV: 170 mL RVSVI: 79 mL/m2
RVEF: 53 % (normal 52-72%, mildly depressed 41-52, moderately depressed 30-40, severely depressed less than 30%).

Left atrium: The left atrium is moderate enlarged, 30-39 sq cm on the four chamber view… The atrium measures 33 square centimeters on the 4 chamber view.

Right atrium: The right atrium is moderate enlarged, 30-39 sq cm on the four chamber view…The atrium measures 37 square centimeters on the 4 chamber view.

Aortic valve: No significant aortic insufficiency.

Pulmonic valve: No significant pulmonic regurgitation.

Phase-contrast aorta: Forward flow of 112 mL.

Phase-contrast pulmonic artery: Forward flow of 122 mL

Qp/Qs: Normal Qp:Qs

Mitral valve: No significant mitral stenosis or regurgitation.

Tricuspid valve: No significant tricuspid stenosis or regurgitation.

Pericardium: No pericardial thickening, abnormal enhancement or pericardial effusion is identified.

Lungs and pleura: No pleural effusions. Limited evaluation of the lungs demonstrate no abnormal signal characteristics.

Visualized upper abdominal organs: Unremarkable.

*European Heart Journal- Cardiovascular imaging (2019) 0, 1-11


  1. Severely enlarged ventricular size. Normal left ventricular systolic function. LVEF: 58 %. Mild concentric symmetric left ventricular hypertrophy measuring 1.1cm at greatest width without delayed myocardial enhancement. Findings compatible with athlete’s heart or concentric left ventricular hypertrophy without obstruction.
  2. Moderately enlarged right ventricular size. Normal right ventricular systolic function. RVEF: 53 %. No right ventricular delayed myocardial enhancement.
  3. No significant valvular abnormalities.
  4. Moderate biatrial enlargement

I had a conversation with my doctor after and he said with the heart I have now, I could live to 100. He said his findings didn’t show patterns associated with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and everything seems to point to a case of athletes heart. He said that he likes to use the echocardiogram for looking at the dimensions and the MRI for patterns/mapping. He said that I am at the very top of the range for normal size, and that he doesn’t know if my heart will continue to grow… but as of now, he said its fine and that I just need to consider how hard I train.

@unreal24278 given what my doctor said, genetic and/or drug induced hypertrophic cardiomyopathy doesn’t really seem to be the issue… I would think it’d be safe for me to run a lower dose TRT + Primo cycle being that it is regarded one of the safest steroids. As long as I watch my heavy lifting, monitor my blood pressure, and do my cardio, I think I should have no concerns. I’m curious as to what your interpretation is?

It’s not my place to interpret results over that of a doctors interpretation. Generally speaking, symmetric ventricular hypertrophy is less worrisome comparative to asymmetric ventricular hypertrophy (of which would be indicative of cardiac maladaptation). I suggest reading into athletes heart and the future risk of atrial fibrillation. Left atrial dilation in particular I believe is correlated with an increased risk for A-fib. Strenuous endurance exercise (excessive, and I do believe you’ve priorly stated you ran marathons?) is sometimes associated with myocardial scarring (fibrosis), cardiac fibrosis predisposes one to arrhythmia. AAS can also induce cardiac enlargement, cardiac fibrosis etc. The cardiac adaptions induced via AAS tend to be maladaptive and associated with significant deteriorations in systolic/diastolic function as opposed to benign enlargement.

You may be particularly prone to cardiac alterations induced via exercise/drugs, this is Russian roulette. You’re cycle outline doesn’t scream “low dosages” to me, generally I think of sub 400-450mg/wk when I think “low dose/baby dosages”. 100mg test 400mg primo is 500mg/wk (anabolic strength probably equatable strength comparative to 350mg test/wk). Due to the non-aromatisable nature of methenolone, I’d hypothesise it’ll be quite harsh on lipids compared to testosterone/nandrolone. Aside from the lipid aspect, it would anecdotally (and within clinical trials) appear to be universally well tolerated within an acute setting.

I don’t want to be the one accused of “fear-mongering” but for a select sub-set of the populace, even low dosages can lead to serious detriment (ask @readalot).

If you search my threads there’s really not much else to say here. You know you have no business running another cycle.

Here, spend 15 minutes watching this:

The last interview with mike matarazzo

Unfortunately, many guys (myself included) will rationalize until they are confronted with health issues that give one a real wake up call.

Also, you have no idea if this is the case. Given the structural observations you already have for your heart, I would reconsider.

Given Chaos Theory’s use in study of heart and arrhythmias, not a great plan to rationalize this away. Again I am not picking on you as I myself am guilty. Small perturbations of the initial condition can a huge effect on the time dependent solution.

Chaos in the Genesis and Maintenance of Cardiac Arrhythmias

The Butterfly Effect

It’s not “fear-mongering”. It’s giving a responsible perspective that the margin of error between individuals may be quite different and for some the margin of error is quite low. Even with vast amount of scientific training and research skills I still rationalized (it’s human nature). Very constructive to give a different perspective to the largely irresponsible use of androgens discussed on here. That’s why you are a valuable contributor here and I see you continuing to become more conservative in your “old age”. I hope you studies take you far and keep up the hard work at value-added activities.


Dude states his good cholesterol was “like zero” for five years! Mike also stated he had a genetic predisposition to having high cholesterol. Undiagnosed familial hypercholesterolemia + AAS is a DEVASTATING combination. To use c17-aa compounds/tren with FH you’d have to be on statins, LDL aphaeresis AND pcsk-9 inhibitors lol

Can’t take statins + c17-aa AAS though, concurrent hepatotoxicity could cause severe damage.