T Nation

Tren, No Testosterone

I’m thinking of doing a cycle. I’m 26 years old, I’ve been lifting heavy for five years, I weigh 190lbs, 6’0".

Here’s the cycle:


1-12: Trenbolone A - 100mg EOD injected, 50mg transdermal DMSO EOD
1-12: H-Drol - 150mg ED
1-12: Proviron - 50mg ED
1-12: Letrozole - 1mg ED
1-12: Nolvadex - 5mg ED
10-12: HCG 300mic E3D

PCT:
12-14: Nolvadex - 25mg ED
12-14: Letrozole - 2.5mg ED
14-16: Nolvadex - 20mg ED
14-16: Letrozole - 1mg ED
16-18: Nolvadex - 10mg ED

So, I want to do a trenbolone cycle with no testosterone. I think it’s easy for me to get gyno, and I’ve never had a problem from having too little estrogen. I’m hoping that the proviron and t-bol help with the mood issues of tren. I’m not sure how it’d help (I was thinking maybe bad mood because of steroids comes from Class II gear and no test causing no activation of AR), but proviron causes a mood lift sort of like testosterone, supposedly.

I’ve got lots of antiestrogen stuff, but I’d rather be extra safe. What sort of issues could I have from no estrogen?

My PCT is long, but it’s also a long cycle. I’m thinking maybe even doing 16 weeks. The letro is in the PCT to help boost testosterone while it’s naturally low, so I don’t lose gains. Is the PCT okay, or should I cut it down?

I plan to inject the tren EOD because ED injections doesn’t sound good. I figure I can try tramsdermal on the off day to help keep my blood level constant. Transdermal does work kind of. I’m going to homebrew the fina, using Bill Robert’s grapeseed oil only method. What sort of syringes should I get? I’m about 10% bodyfat. Is a half inch needle long enough? The smaller the volume of the syringe, the easier it is to inject, right? Bill wrote he uses a 1cc insulin syringe. I need to inject more than one mL, so I plan to buy a 3cc syringe, and a 27g 1/2" needle. Does that sound okay for injecting homebrew fina?

I know this cycle isn’t what is usually recommened, but I think it’s what I want for my goals.

It looks daft, but not necessarily because it’s tren-only.

If you can post your thoughts on WHY it might be daft, then I’m sure people here will elaborate for you.

Why are you planning to use antiestrogens in a cycle that includes no compounds with any conversion to estrogen, and which will almost completely shut down natural estrogen production?

I would really suggest discarding this entire cycle, beginning to end, every detail. Why not go with tried and true approaches.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Why are you planning to use antiestrogens in a cycle that includes no compounds with any conversion to estrogen, and which will almost completely shut down natural estrogen production?

I would really suggest discarding this entire cycle, beginning to end, every detail. Why not go with tried and true approaches.[/quote]

I got a little bit of gyno with h-drol, which is supposed to be dry. With PHs the metabolites are unknown. Also I think regulat t-bol might convert to estrogen slightly. It’s just a small dose anti-es anyway, I might only use the letro. People say estrogen is necessary but I don’t know why, I get hard.

I’m more worried about the tren with no test. I’m not sure what that’d be like. But, I think that’s more hearsay. People run halotestin or other strong class 1s without testosterone and do okay.

Why is this cycle is daft? The extra chemicals are probably overkill, but I’m very susceptible to gyno. There’s no testosterone, but people run oral only cycles and do well. This is sort of like a supercharged anavar only cycle.

I think the base of the cycle is solid. I’m running tren, the only dry, class 1 strong enough to be the core of a real cycle. I added h-drol for the ar, nonar combination. The proviron is there to bind to shbg, boost my mood (because testosteron feels awesome, but tren doesn’t?), and help with gyno, which can happen with dry steroids. I know this isn’t what’s usually recommended, but I think for my goals it’s good. With a testosterone cycle, theres always some estrogen. But, I’ve never tried this cycle. Maybe there’s a definate reason why I shouldnt that I don’t know.

Is there a dry cycle that can give similar gains besides the one I want to do?

Also, everything in my cycle is easy to get, and I know what is actually in my drugs, no risk of deca and test instead of tren.

[quote]Lover95 wrote:
I got a little bit of gyno with h-drol, which is supposed to be dry. [/quote]
Did the gyno show up during or post cycle? Was it your first cycle? Where there other compounds in the stack?

[quote]jMill2 wrote:

[quote]Lover95 wrote:
I got a little bit of gyno with h-drol, which is supposed to be dry. [/quote]
Did the gyno show up during or post cycle? Was it your first cycle? Where there other compounds in the stack?[/quote]

It showed up during the cycle. I was running h-drol only at 150mg. It was my second cycle. It maybe wasn’t gyno, I’ve never seen full blown gyno, but I got firm fat pads directly under my nipples even though I was at a low bodyfat%. I had itchy nipples also. It looked exactly like the gyno pictures with the fat placement, but it wasn’t too bad, I started running letro at 2.5mg per day and nolva at 10mg per day and my chest shrank overnight. I didn’t feel any different even though I had no estrogen, so why not run anties?

[quote]Lover95 wrote:
I Way [quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Why are you planning to use antiestrogens in a cycle that includes no compounds with any conversion to estrogen, and which will almost completely shut down natural estrogen production?

I would really suggest discarding this entire cycle, beginning to end, every detail. Why not go with tried and true approaches.[/quote]

I got a little bit of gyno with h-drol, which is supposed to be dry. With PHs the metabolites are unknown. Also I think regulat t-bol might convert to estrogen slightly. It’s just a small dose anti-es anyway, I might only use the letro. People say estrogen is necessary but I don’t know why, I get hard.

I’m more worried about the tren with no test. I’m not sure what that’d be like. But, I think that’s more hearsay. People run halotestin or other strong class 1s without testosterone and do okay.

Why is this cycle is daft? The extra chemicals are probably overkill, but I’m very susceptible to gyno. There’s no testosterone, but people run oral only cycles and do well. This is sort of like a supercharged anavar only cycle.

I think the base of the cycle is solid. I’m running tren, the only dry, class 1 strong enough to be the core of a real cycle. I added h-drol for the ar, nonar combination. The proviron is there to bind to shbg, boost my mood (because testosteron feels awesome, but tren doesn’t?), and help with gyno, which can happen with dry steroids. I know this isn’t what’s usually recommended, but I think for my goals it’s good. With a testosterone cycle, theres always some estrogen. But, I’ve never tried this cycle. Maybe there’s a definate reason why I shouldnt that I don’t know.

Is there a dry cycle that can give similar gains besides the one I want to do?

Also, everything in my cycle is easy to get, and I know what is actually in my drugs, no risk of deca and test instead of tren.[/quote]

Jesus christ

To stay ‘dry’ keep estrogen in check and just don’t eat like a fat bastard (i.e. lower carbs). You also have to be relatively lean to be seen as ‘dry’.

As for using crappy prohormones: One of the problems common with them is that the same brand name gets used fro different compounds at different times.

The current “Halodrol” doesn’t contain anything estrogenic. I don’t know about past products.

But this is simply another weird aspect of your proposed cycle: good steroid cycles don’t include things like that.

There is no reason to go do weird things that, for quite good reason, others who are experienced and knowledgeable in steroid use have not been doing.

1st cycle? 8-12 weeks of 500mg test/week kgo

[quote]Lover95 wrote:
I think the base of the cycle is solid. [/quote]

And this is where your thinking is off, sorry.

A ‘touch’ of gyno from some questionable PH doesn’t justify completely flatlining your estrogen/libido for 12 weeks IMO.

Put it this way, you won’t be ‘lover95’ for 12 weeks if you use tren only, PLUS arimidex. No, you’ll be more like ‘erectile dysfunction and sore joints95’.

And you are injecting EOD. If you are going with such a messy cycle, at least get something right; acetate should be injected ED for stability. I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that 2 x day is better freq. for such a short ester. That’s what I do, anyway.

BBB

[quote]bushidobadboy2 wrote:

[quote]Lover95 wrote:
I think the base of the cycle is solid. [/quote]

And this is where your thinking is off, sorry.

A ‘touch’ of gyno from some questionable PH doesn’t justify completely flatlining your estrogen/libido for 12 weeks IMO.

Put it this way, you won’t be ‘lover95’ for 12 weeks if you use tren only, PLUS arimidex. No, you’ll be more like ‘erectile dysfunction and sore joints95’.

And you are injecting EOD. If you are going with such a messy cycle, at least get something right; acetate should be injected ED for stability. I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that 2 x day is better freq. for such a short ester. That’s what I do, anyway.

BBB[/quote]

Thanks for the advice Bill Roberts and everyone. I have used letro and nolva before at a low dose, and have a huge drop in libido or any soreness in my joints. But, I can try just using the proviron for estrogen control. I guess if I start to get itchy nipples I can then start with the letro or nolva. I plan to maybe use prami with the tren also.

Can you tell me about the possible issues of running tren without testosterone? That’s what 'm most worried about since everyone says it’d a bad idea, and I’ve never tried it. I realize it’s a tried and true method to use always use test with tren, but has anyone tried just tren? I’m not planning on a grams of tren per week anyway. I read that it used to be that all cycles should have some sort of testosterone, but it seems like oral only cycles of anavar or something are becoming more common.

Does pinning every day cause problems? I would think it’d be hard to do leg lifts with so much pinning, especially since homemade tren is sort of sketchy and viscous. Do you notice a drop in blood levels with EOD tren A? I was thinking I could use transdermal tren on the off days just to keep stuff constant. How do you rotate injection sites? Which gauge needles do you use? Does homemade tren oil cause any additional problems? I’m not worried about the hassle of pinning so much, I just do not want an abcess, especially since it’d all the way to the muscle. Do you use antibiotics during a cycles with so much pinning just as a safety measure? Would it be okay to do a course or two of antibiotics while using an oral steroid?

I use a 29 gauge 1/2 inch insulin needle.

The same total volume injected per week in fewer, smaller injections is easier on the muscles, not harder.

Yes, some including myself have run trenbolone without any aromatizing steroid (e.g. testosterone) when not having yet discovered that this is not the thing to do.

It isn’t the case that all cycles must have testosterone: another aromatizing steroid such as Dianabol will also work fine (more than fine) with trenbolone, if one likes.

Finasol (my delivery transdermal delivery method for trenbolone acetate transdermally) is good stuff but it’s wasteful compared to injecting trenbolone acetate. It is best suited for someone who isn’t prepared to make an injectable and cannot obtain or does not want to buy UG injectable trenbolone. I essentially never bother posting how to make Finasol anymore (and really don’t intend to now either, particularly as I don’t remember the finer details) because really, injecting is more efficient, and it’s not that hard to make a quality injectable.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
I use a 29 gauge 1/2 inch insulin needle.

The same total volume injected per week in fewer, smaller injections is easier on the muscles, not harder.

Yes, some including myself have run trenbolone without any aromatizing steroid (e.g. testosterone) when not having yet discovered that this is not the thing to do.

It isn’t the case that all cycles must have testosterone: another aromatizing steroid such as Dianabol will also work fine (more than fine) with trenbolone, if one likes.

Finasol (my delivery transdermal delivery method for trenbolone acetate transdermally) is good stuff but it’s wasteful compared to injecting trenbolone acetate. It is best suited for someone who isn’t prepared to make an injectable and cannot obtain or does not want to buy UG injectable trenbolone. I essentially never bother posting how to make Finasol anymore (and really don’t intend to now either, particularly as I don’t remember the finer details) because really, injecting is more efficient, and it’s not that hard to make a quality injectable.[/quote]

So the issues caused by running trenbolone only are the issues of not having estrogen? That makes sense, I guess. I have heard people say that trenbolone causes extra issues. Can you tell me a little more about what it’s like to run tren only? That’s what I’m wondering most about, and I haven’t found specific information about what it feels like, just people saying it’s a bad idea.

People run cycles with only dry drugs. Tren and 30mg d-bol sounds good though, or maybe a little bit of anadrol. I’ll probably just use an aromatizing OCT steroid. I wonder if I could even mix like one synovex-h implant per nine finaplix to add some estrogen. Part of the reason why I’ve made this cycle is UG suppliers are usually a huge hassle.

I’ve know of a few transdermal methods. I’ve read about mixing it with rubbing alcohol and then spraying it from a spray bottle. I don’t know about that, but people can mix tren with dmso liquid or gel, or phlojel. The way I recommend is getting a pill crusher, crushing up three times the dose the person wants to have absorbed, and then just mixing it with a little bit of dmso.

Mixed with DMSO, it causes red pee in a day or two, unlike plojel (which I don’t think works well). It’s not the most efficient way to do tren, but fina isn’t very expensive, depending on the daily dose, and it does work.

Thanks for all the posts, I’m listening to what’s being said and changing my plans. Bill’s streamlined tren recipe is why I’m going with a homebrew injectable instead of transdermal tren or metribolone.

Would you stop using terms like “dry” and “wet” please. This isn’t the wave pool at Sesame Place.

Some drugs aromatize to estrogen and others dont. Ancillary drug choice is (partly) based on that.

On peculiar adverse side effects of trenbolone: some can suffer or have tendencies towards insomnia (though whether this should count as peculiar or not is debatable, this can happen with other androgens as well, but seemingly less often), and some can suffer or sometimes suffer night sweats. And then there’s “tren cough” which can occur randomly on some injections. This is a very unpleasant brief coughing fit beginning within seconds after the injection, not a chronic cough.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
On peculiar adverse side effects of trenbolone: some can suffer or have tendencies towards insomnia (though whether this should count as peculiar or not is debatable, this can happen with other androgens as well, but seemingly less often), and some can suffer or sometimes suffer night sweats. And then there’s “tren cough” which can occur randomly on some injections. This is a very unpleasant brief coughing fit beginning within seconds after the injection, not a chronic cough.
[/quote]
To address the insomnia and night sweats I got them both very badly my first two tren runs which were also done in the presence of 750-1000mg a week of test. Despite the tren itself being only 300-400mg a week. My last tren run was 600mg a week but only 200-250mg/wk of the test and I had almost zero insomnia and almost zero night sweats. For me and for many others lowering test to near TRT levels enables use of tren with substantially reduced “classic tren sides” as compared with higher test doses.
The greatest indicator for me though was blood pressure. On 1G of test and 400mg of tren I routinely had BP around 150/95. Flip that to 200mg test and 600 mg tren [also 600mg mast, so same quantity total 1400mg of injectables] BP was 110/75

To answer your question regarding a tren only cycle and to describe my experience:

I ran a similar 12 week tren only cycle but actually did a higher dose – 100mg 5x/week. No test or other steroids. I ran some letro mainly to be cautious as I can be gyno prone, too, as well as some bromocriptine to avoid the so-called prolactin associated gyno which can be associated with tren. This was my third cycle with tren, so I had some experience and kinda knew what to expect.

My results? Really great lean gains (not bulk) without any significant side effects on cycle. It is a great cycle for lean strength gains… probably the best I’ve been on.

I would suggest adding an anti-prolactin med to your regimen if you’re running tren. The most popular ones now seem to be pramipexole or dostinex. I think either would work fine. And like others have said, ditch the pro-hormone.

Be warned: coming off a this tren cycle was a bitch, and looking back on it I’d probably opt for a test taper or other protocol rather then just the standard PCT. Gyno flared up bad coming off cycle despite my best efforts and extensive PCT. We all know tren shuts you down hard, so be prepared for a long recovery.

One last thing – I found that recrystallizing the fina stopped completely the sides of insomnia and night sweats, which leads me to believe that perhaps impurities left behind by standard conversion kits were causing these sides. Nothing stopped the rare and nasty tren cough though.

Good luck…

Reading about steroids on this and other forums makes me cry. Its like putting together a 100000 pieces of puzzle with eyes blind folded and pieces missing.

So, what you guys are saying that running a cycle with non-aromatizing compounds is unhealthy because our bodies stop producing estrogen which in turn shuts down libido and gives sore joints?

In that case i would like a comment on the following information i got from some other place i cant remember at the moment. (I know its a long article but stay with me please)

Dont know how i use the bold feature but ive market the part i find interesting with -------

----------------------------Article-------------------------

Background:
I began BBing with a trainer from Germany. In educating me, he related to me that, in his time BBing there, European BBers were relatively without American influence. Common practice called for the use of short halflife ester injectables, the variety of which was very much greater than exists today, combined with mild orals like Anavar and Winstrol and, sometimes, Dbol. Short cycles(2-4 weeks) were also the norm. Most interesting, use of test was very uncommon, and considered a horror. What was commonly used was Parabolan, what we, today, call Trenbolone. Eight week cycles were virtually unheard of, and the desire to pack on 20-40 pounds in such a short time was unthinkable. European BBers took a much more unhurried pace of growth. Young, competitive BBers were very much smaller than those found in the US, today, due to this orderly pace of growth. It was only the very rare, genetically unusual BBer who was big at a young age. Europeans simply had a different outlook and different standards.

Early on, my trainer lamented the situation he found in the US: heavy dependance upon test, long halflife esters used in long cycles, gross overeating, poor estrogen suppression, acceptance of high bodyfat percentages, and excessive lbm development in short timespans. He was horrified at what he envisioned would be the longterm consequences of widespread use of these practices. He was associated with IFBB pros, like Zhur, el Sonbaty, Schlierkamp, and Ruhl, while in Europe. He was well aware of the health complications associated with extreme muscularity. He kept reiterating “BBing is a sport for life”.

While still a natural, I began to examine how an entire philosphy of AAS use might be developed, based upon the European experience. By the time it was appropriate for me to begin AAS, years later, I already had a plan. Initially, I quietly used myself as a lab rat. The results became quite visible, and, before too long, questions followed. My trainer asked that we work together, to develop a new way for his athletes to grow. And here we are…

Characteristics of AAS:
There are two clearly discernable characteristics of interest to BBers. Anabolic: muscle growth/hypertrophy. and Androgenic: strength, aggression, fat burning. Most AAS possess these two characteristics in varying ratios, and in various strengths. For example, Halotestin may be seen to produce a pure androgenic response, but no anabolic response. Deca, on the other hand, will produce anabolism with no significant androgenic response. Test produces roughly a 50 percent anabolic response, and 50 percent androgenic response. Then there is strength of response. Winstrol is a moderate, pure anabolic. Anavar is a moderate, pure androgen. Trenbolone is a very powerful androgen(80 percent of total response), much more powerful than the androgenic characteristics of test. Tren’s anabolic characteristic(20 percent of total response), is weaker than that of test. And so on. I have built a complete table of response characteristics of all the AAS components we use.

Site injection and localized growth:
Time and time again, we have seen localized growth response to site injected, esterless and short halflife AAS. I no longer accept that a positive response is anecdotal. It’s just too commonplace, in my own work. Consequently, we no longer waste gear in glutes and quads. We identify and then site inject any and all lagging bodyparts, in a rotating injection program. And we have seen some startling responses. In nearly every case, we prefer tren and an esterless AAS, for the most powerful response. There must be weak-, or non-responders, but I have yet to find any. I owe much, in this particular area, to the work of Paul Borreson.

Cycle design:
Cycles are assembled by, first, determining the end response characteristics desired, and assembling components whose AAS characteristics interlock together to produce that end response with a minimum of overlap, over the cycle timespan desired. Consider this cycle: Nandrolone phenylpropionate(EOD), tren(EOD), Winstrol depot((ED), optional Anavar(ED). I’ve remarked, elsewhere, on the desireability of pairing tren with Winstrol. We require the use of a pure androgen for EVERY cycle, to insure strength, onging muscle definition, density, and post cycle androgenicity, so Anavar is our choice for this cycle. Here, Tren is our primary androgen, and nandrolone our primary anabolic. All of these agents are selected for their lack of water retention. All are either short acting or esterless, so that meets our requirements for site injection. And, yes, we do site inject it all. We begin by frontloading the estered injectables, up to three days before cycle day zero, and add the orals and esterless injectables at cycle day minus one. On cycle day zero, the AAS is already active, with blood levels increasing. We end the injectables and orals, suitably in advance of the end of the cycle, so that, on cycle day 15, the AAS is non-inhibitory, and HTPA recovery begins immediately. Add on 14 days further system recovery, and then a cycle can begin anew. Seven weeks, total. Over a year, this might be acccomplished seven times. When HCG, and an anti-e at suitable dosage, are added to the Clomid, the HTPA may be recovered in only 2 weeks. This shortens the next cycle availability point by one week.

Yes, it’s a lot of injections. And the Winstrol hurts.

What might be expected, in the way of results? Bulking, we have seen as much as 10 pounds lbm. Average is five pounds. Over a year, that’s 35 pounds. You say, “Hell, I can grow that much in 8 weeks”. I say, let’s see how many times a year you can accomplish that, and over how many years do you think you will continue to accomplish that? We have this steady, measured growing, going on and on. My guess is that this approach, using only a modest bulking diet, rather than the typical American pig-out bulking diet, can be accomplished for years and years. Due to short cycle length and rational diet design, there is very little fat gain. No pressing need to cut. No need to look like the typical big, smooth BBer, who only looks cut once a year. Our people are lean, defined, and feel healthy, all the time. They only spend two weeks out of seven(or six), cycling. And, since they get normalized quickly, they can train and grow natural, more quickly, because there is none of the weeks and weeks of getting that slow AAS out of their systems. The BBer doing the typical 8 week long acting ester cycle, exists for weeks in a kind of limbo, where the blood levels are not high enough for anabolism, but are still inhibitory, and he must wait all that extra time. My people are off, longer than they are on. Their bodies, free of drugs.

We tend to avoid test. Not completely; just most of the time. What we found is that, anytime you use test, it magnifies the sides of whatever you use with it. Tren, used in rational dosages, is relatively free of sides, and causes fewer overall sides during cycles. We use tren, like the typical BBer uses test. With tren, you get much more response, with much lower dosages, with greater androgenic intensity. Someone once wrote that tren was “the gear of the gods”. Indeed, the Europeans brought to BBing AAS, a very great gift. We do use test, but only for very specialized purposes.

We only use one type of eight week bulk cycle. That for Boldenone, which now can only be obtained in a very long halflife ester. We are working with a supplier, and are patiently awaiting him to provide us with our first esterless Boldenone. Testing will begin immediately afterwords, to develop new dosage and protocols, following which, we expect to end our use of nandrolone phenylpropionate. Too many of our clients exhibit some degree of bloat from progesterone aromatization, emerging from the nandrolone. We consider any bloat, from any origin, entirely unacceptable, on health and esthetic grounds.

Bodyfat gain on cycles:
Ever notice how productive of muscle, a cycle usually is, during the first four weeks, and how it slows down and bodyfat accumulates, during the second four weeks? You end up eating more, in the attempt to return things to the former rate. More bodyfat. Finally, the whole process slows down for good. What’s going on? The common explanation is that you are getting bigger, so that requires more nutrition. We say no. We say the body realizes what is going on, it exhausts and compensates, and body metabolism and developmental processes simply will no longer support this process. But you continue to eat. And that food has got no place else to go, but be turned into fat, with unproductive lbm production.

Our short cycle designs, whether for 2, 3, or 4 weeks features tren, as a foundation, which is a potent fat burner, due to powerful androgenicity, and will not aromatize to estrogen. And a diet, which is clean, and appropriately sized for rational lbm gain, while minimizing conversion to fat. Later, the body is clean of AAS, and primed for most sensitive and effective response, before the cycle begins. The conversion from nutrition to muscle takes place under optimum conditions, at low bodyfat levels. The AAS ramp-up is swift and full, and the cycle ends before the system can de-sensitize and cause spillover of nutrition to bodyfat.

Estrogen pileup is another cause of bodyfat accumulation, during the typical 8 week, long halflife ester cycle. I suggest that readers visit the AE zine Issue 46, and download the blood concentration calculator from the excellent article on blood concentration of various halflife esters of AAS. Then, plug in your long halflife ester cycle components, and witness the startling blood level concentrations of what you are injecting, late in the cycle. Using the typical paltry anti-e dosages of the typical BBer, is it any wonder that, late in the cycle, estrogen levels build up out of control, and bodyfat follows?

-------------------This is where the part about estrogen which I find contradicting------

Estrogen and anti-e:
It is an obsolete belief that estrogen is necessary in any cycle. Indeed, ANY amount of estrogen is BAD in any cycle! There is not one study which supports the notion. But the idea lived on in yet another obsolete notion; that water weight is good weight, in a cycle. That, water introduced into the muscle, causes increased lifts, and by lifting heavier, greater growth is obtained. The experts would purposely advise minimal amounts of anti-estrogen drugs, only to minimize the chance of gyno, but to insure lots of this, supposedly, desireable water weight. On the AE boards, I have witnessed these experts advising NO anti-e’s, but only to have some Nolvadex at hand, to deal with gyno, should it appear. Not only do you end up with fake strength and fake muscle size, but, at the same time, the estrogen buildup causes high blood pressure, electrolyte imbalance, and a host of health issues. There is water buildup in the lower back to the extent that posts frequently document BBers in pain, cramps, and difficulty, attempting deads. The champions of this approach say “Oh just take some ibuprofen, and you will be just fine”. Try asking your liver what it thinks about that approach. Following the cycle, the water disappears, along with the strength and size it fooled the user into believing was real muscle. This often causes depression, and chases the user into a course of Creatine, to re-introduce that fake size and strength. The muscle character appears smooth, and the density is poor. When the BBer diets down, all this is lost, and the truth is seen. It’s no wonder that certain other experts advise that BBers never come off AAS, so this scenario may never be exposed for what it is: a rollercoaster of reality versus water weight. I agree with them. It is not healthy to run back and forth between lost size and fullness caused by water weight. But it also is not a good thing to stay on AAS, all the time, either. This is a totally brain dead approach to AAS use. And the BBer who engages in it never attains the quality, defined physique he deserves. It’s just alot of smooth water weight and high bodyfat.

And bodyfat. Everyone should know that the presence of excess estrogen causes fat deposition. The greater and the longer the exposure to elevated levels of estrogen, the greater the bodyfat accumulation. Endos, listen up; stay away from any situation which creates elevated estrogen levels. Everyone, listen up; it is OBSOLETE cycle technology to enable anything but minimal levels of estrogen, at any time. Estrogen is evil, and it is NOT your friend. Using anti-e’s cannot reduce estrogen to levels below which the male body cannot function properly. It requires very little estrogen to function, and no anti-e removes it all.

What to do? Begin, with an entirely different approach. Say that ANY water weight is BAD weight. That estrogen must be banished, to the fullest rational extent. And that the muscle you grow and see is, in fact, muscle, and not water. That the muscle produced will be dense and well defined. A quality physique. How, then does one obtain that increased strength, which the water provided, to enhance growth during the cycle? As stated, we first kill off the estrogen and bloat. Second, we emphasize the introduction of powerful androgens into the cycle structure. I am speaking, once again, of tren and anavar. Together, these components make you VERY strong. And with NO bloat or estrogen required. The concentrated androgenicity encourages intense, aggressive workouts, while also encouraging fat burning. It is very commonplace to observe body recompositions during such cycles. In other words, you get big and lose bodyfat, simultaneously. The androgenicity also produces significantly increased muscle density and definition. At cycle end, what you end up with, is the real deal. Solid muscle, growth, and increased definition. No need to rush to the nearest container of creatine to stem your losses. And that strength is yours, to keep. And no test…

Now, go back to that blood concentration calculator, and compare the blood concentrations of the typical 75 mg EOD of tren, to what you were subjecting yourself to, with that long halflife ester cycle. No stress caused by estrogen pileup, either. Now, you tell me which alternative is better.

What do we use to suppress Estrogen? Well, we formerly used grams of Arimidex per day. Arimidex is now an antique for us. We use Femara. We prefer one 2.5 mg tab ED. Our clients are kept dry as a bone. We will begin to study Aromasin, in mid-September. Aromasin utilizes a different approach to Estrogen control, which promises to be even more powerful than Femara. But research indicates that IGF-1 production is not suppressed by Femara, but may, in fact, be enhanced by it. We do not see that with Aromasin. Time and experimentation will tell.

Most importantly, we keep our people on anti-e, post cycle, during the HTPA recovery process, and later. This both speeds recovery of the HTPA, as well as minimizing fat buildup, while hormone levels fluctuate wildly.

Androgenicity and quality:
BBers commonly justify their long cycles by saying that they need the long cycle to enable “consolidation”. They observe that this effect only occurs late in the cycle. Why is this? It’s because the androgen level of the Sustanon test, typically used, takes that long to pile up and affect the muscularity of the BBer. But what about Trenbolone? Almost without fail, users commonly report density and hardening to appear within a few weeks. Why is this? Because the androgenic response of tren is so much more powerful than that of test. You can get this response to produce quality muscle at dosages of only 75 mg EOD, in less than a month. In a Sustanon test, it takes many weeks to accumulate an immense blood concentration, to achieve the same result. It is commonplace to observe tren users burning fat, while they cycle. Sust users never report this effect. Why? Once again, the androgenic response of tren is so much greater than that of test. Intense androgenicity induces fat burning. If Anavar is added, the androgenicity effect is intensified, still further.

Ever hear of the term “muscle maturity”? It describes muscle which is dense and defined. The commonly accepted belief is that it takes years and years to acquire this muscle characteristic. But why? Because, using test, the exposure to the muscle hardening androgenicity only occurs for about two weeks in the typical long cycle. And that cycle can only be repeated a few times a year. In the tren/anavar-based short cycle, the exposure to muscle hardening androgenicity occurs for longer periods, and the cycle can be repeated many times a year. “Muscle maturity”, and quality, appears with rapidity, and not with years and years. I see muscle quality in only one year of regular short cycling, which I never see in the typical long cycle BBer, unless it occurs for years. Which would you prefer?

The issue of health:
There are those who say the typical American method of cycling, using long acting ester cycles, for 8 weeks or more, and eating 7-10,000 calories per day, for all that time, is no danger to health. To that, I say this: in the millions of years of human evolution, at no time, ever, has the male of our species been exposed to the barrage of hormonal, metabolic, and developmental pressure and manipulation, as occurs during the long acting ester eight week cycle. Do you really believe our bodies were engineered and evolved to deal with this attack, as well as the stress of being forced to add 20-40 pounds of lbm and bodyfat in this same timespan, over and over, again? Don’t be a fool. If you believe so, then you are whistling past the cemetery. And there are additional fools, who would have you believe that staying on this course, continuously, can do you no harm. This is, currently, an unprecedented, uncontrolled lab experiment, taking place all over the world, with thousands of men as lab rats. The long term outcome cannot be predicted by anyone, today. True, every single one of us will die, someday. My people and I have no intention of hastening the arrival of that inevitable day, just to look big in a coffin, as we are laid to our eternal rest. What the hell is YOUR hurry? And, what if you don’t die? What if you are forced to leave your beloved sport, and spend the rest of your days, living with hypertension and heart damage due to tachycardia. And kidney damage caused by the hypertension. And still other health issue possibilities. Is this any way to live? It’s a personal value judgement and risk assessment process. Step back for a moment, and re-evaluate your position and priorities.

The end game:
One other matter, which few consider. Everyone has a genetically pre-programmed maximum of lbm, which their body will suppport, regardless of whether you reach it, via AAS. The faster you approach it, the sooner your gains will decline, no matter how much juice you cycle, and how often you cycle it. You will end up spending money, juicing larger quantities of gear, and stressing your body, for diminishing returns. Finally, you are tapped out. All the slin, growth hormone, IGF-1, and whatever else you toss at it, will never get you past that limit. In a minority of individuals, they will attain immense lbm gains, over time. The rest of us, face the remainder of our BBing careers, re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. All we accomplish is staying right where we are, until we leave the sport in frustration.

BBing is a sport for life. Why exhaust yourself and your body, in a hurry to arrive at the end of the journey, earlier than you need to? I’m 48 years old, and I look forward to growing and growing, for as long as I remain in the sport. We have a 65 year old client, who last competed 11 years ago. We did a few short cycles with him, dieted and prepped him, and he walked away with a second prize trophy, healthy and happy. Have any of you ever considered that you might still be able to lift and compete at that age? You better forget it, if all you can think of is slamming on endless pounds, today and tomorrow. Your time in BBing will either end in poor health, or the frustration of having reached your limit, and going no further.

Summary:
I have presented, above, only the most basic introduction to my philosophy and approach to short cycling, and offered only a simple example out of a program which I spent years developing. I have devised an entire series of special-purpose cycles, each of which embody most, if not all of the above principles.

The purpose of the short cycle is to employ moderate dosages of short halflife ester and esterless injectable and oral AAS, combined with moderate and healthy diet, to promote moderate stress anabolic growth, over time. This same process results in very high quality muscle production, which only increases with each cycle, and minimal health impact. It assumes a long term outlook. It is intended for the mature and rational BBer, who expects to remain in the sport for the rest of his life. If you truly love BBing, you never want to leave, and you want to keep your interest and grow, then consider how the short cycle might be what you need for your future in our beloved sport.

Finally:
I want to take the time to publically thank my very special friends and clients, who put their faith in me, and assisted me by using my protocols. Through their invaluable feedback and experience, they enabled me to refine and perfect my overall program. Without them, this all would be nothing but theory. Some are former and present members of this fine board.

And thank you, for taking the time to read all these words. I hope they help you in your journey, as BBers.

Well, actually I admit I did not read all those words.

I’m guessing that your question is answered by saying that RELATIVELY LOW DOSES of non-aromatizing-only steroids can be used and this does not completely shut down T production.

E.g., no one has estrogen-deficiency problems, that I know of anyway, on 400 mg Primobolan per week.

It’s a different story with a cycle strong enough to be fully inhibitory.

Also, individuals will differ in their tolerance to abnormally low estrogen. For example I can tolerate it better than is typical: for the detectable effects are only libido and some slight depressive effect on mood. For many others, joint pain is a predictable result.

Alternately, instead of trying to piece together a theoretical understanding from picking pieces here and there from all over, you could go by practice. Experienced users – including not only time of use but breadth of experience – don’t use trenbolone only. Period. Some have tried it once, but no one (or virtually no one) sticks with it.

Either this is out of dumbness, or it is because of observation on their part that this is not the way to go.

It’s not the way to go.

(Nor is trenbolone plus a crappy PH.)