I’m seeing many instances where people are having success on a “TRT+” protocol as a forever cruise with no blast. The idea is to normalize the body’s reaction (to minimize sides) through long term use of a TRT protocol which is above normal TRT doses but below blast, dialing in a sweet spot at the highest doses that keep blood levels in acceptable ranges. No blasts.
I’m thinking of the “Supersize Me” guy that ate Mcdonalds everyday and had horrible lipids, liver enzymes, etc. Until his body adapted and normalized to the junk and his bloods all returned to near normal.
Maybe the rollercoastering effect of cycles/blast-cruise adds to the negative effects on the body?
I’m intrigued by this TRT+ approach. Any experiences?
I have been experimenting with ‘upper’ TRT doses of 250-300mg, paired with a proper workout/diet regime OFC. i definitely see good progress. in terms of effects on blood markers, my HCT is above range, but it is true for 100-150mg doses as well. i think at age of 44/fairly good health this is acceptable for me.
the upper limit for me is where I don’t get e2 sides/need an AI. i don’t get too anxious/edgy (somewhere above 300mg). but otherwise I don’t see problems running this.
Its not a new thing. Since people stopped being stupid and doing cycles some 20-30 years back, this just is THE thing.
Cycling and quiting is a thing only done by newbs in forums or those who didnt care to update their knowledge during those decades.
The question I have is what is more effective. Cruising at more traditional TRT levels and blasting moderately (ex. 500 mg/wk for 12 weeks) once a year, or cruising at 50-100 mg/wk more with no blasts?
Another question is what would be healthier? Maybe it depends on the person? I’d think it would be fairly equal?
One thing I like about the higher cruise idea is that it would likely keep me from bulking so hard during a blast, then having extra fat to cut during cruise. It would provide a more stable physique through the year.
Thats one of the advantages I’m considering too
Respect Hank. Not cycling and quiting I’m referring too.
Instead of Blast/Cruise, its just Enhanced Cruise all the time with no Blast. Another way to look at it might be:
Basic Example: You Cruise on 200 mg Test per week and do three 8 week Blasts a year at 400 Test per week. So, you spend 6 months of the year at 200 Test and 6 months at 400 Test. Instead, is it better to just stay on 300 mg Test all year 'round. Just plug in the numbers for whatever your actual is.
I honestly just think this is due to social media ppl telling everyone they’re on “TRT” when in fact they are running higher doses or more compounds. The idea of TRT has become very trendy, I see post from more young ppl wanting to get on TRT rather than wanting to run a cycle, because the guys they look up to all talk about being on TRT. I think it’s just a result of their influence. Back in my day TRT wasn’t really a thing so we all talked about cycles.
I see very little worry of doing one cycle a year, along with TRT. Either low dose T+Oxandrolone (or oral of your choice) or just higher dose T. The impacts to our health are measured over decades, and can’t imagine 8-16 weeks of “unhealthy” is going to have a great lasting impact. I suppose I could be wrong about that. These days guys who do blast are more focused on BP management, lipid management, and watching CBC than we were in the past. Have to think that it’s safer to do a cycle today than it was 20 years ago.
I agree. However, would it be much risk running something like 250 mg/wk Test as a long term protocol? If lipids, BP, hematocrit look good, I don’t really know if it would be all that bad.
I see this with the “true TRT dose” guys vs the TRT+ guys. The former say it’s not within normal ranges, so it is bad. What does bad mean here? If health markers are inline, does a dose like 250 mg/wk do harm long term? IDK to be honest.
We cant really answer that just like we cant answer if steroids trully kill people because most deaths happening would happen anyway due to predisposition to a dissease. We know side effects of stuff but there are side effects to many things and people die and not die doing it all. So does having a high htc actually hurts someones life to a noticeable effect? We don’t know.
Lately i believe that for long term - blasting is pointless. Ever since im on low doses on stuff i look different but mostly i have lost strength to an extent of at least 1 plate on each side if the bar on every lift. It’s crazy but whats more crazy is understanding that upping the dose is basically paying money for a better lift and it makes no sense to me.
So if you are interested on a physique or performance that is there with you all the time and doesnt depend on drug and meal timing and having to pin whole CCs daily, blasting makes no sense ever.
So me personally am focused nowdays on what i can get by with to be somewhat ok with how i look and perform and then see how by BP and other shit looks like.
But the end result will definitely not be true trt as i do have a wish to be above the average, so ill probably end up on 500-600mgs of something forever instead of 2 grams for a year and then a 3 month cruise. And then just hope for the best.
Yeah I can’t imagine it would be a problem really. If you’re managing all the health markers. I’m sure some would say that you’re not getting heart or organ imaging done then you don’t really know the impact, but if it’s just test at moderate-high doses, I don’t see a problem.
Guys on reddit ask all the time “is having my test at 1300ng bad?” And I always tell them that’s the wrong question. They should ask if their health markers and organs are healthy at that dose. Then I would guess it’s fine.
I’d imagine that a lot of the organ health would come down to blood pressure. High blood pressure is tough on the heart and the kidneys. Yeah, having really a really high amount of AAS in your system for long periods can actually cause direct hypertrophy. I am not sure if cardiac hypertrophy would occur long term on something like 200-250 mg/wk test if BP is normal or better. It helps if one is in general “jacked”, meaning low body fat. I think a lot of the health issues are a result of just being way bigger than natural.
I would guess no, but it’s probably individual. I would think that would be fine tho.