ExcelMale
Menu
Home
What's new
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Videos
Lab Tests
Doctor Finder
Buy Books
About Us
Men’s Health Coaching
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Clinical Use of Anabolics and Hormones
Clinical Use of Anabolics and Hormones
Nandrolone Experiences
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Cataceous" data-source="post: 170735" data-attributes="member: 38109"><p>Considering that the testosterone is bioidentical, I'd say the burden of proof is on those saying something different is happening.</p><p></p><p></p><p>So you sample at least every hour to ensure you're finding the peak? No? When did you sample? You'd have to be truly extraordinary to have such a low peak testosterone on this dose. It's equivalent to over 300 mg of cypionate per week.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Arbitrary definitions. [USER=39869]@Paul M[/USER]'s description is still perfectly reasonable, and he did add the "low dose" qualifier. Don't know why you want to jump on him for that...</p><p></p><p></p><p>It's hardly irresponsible to call it what it is, and to question the wisdom of dosing at three times the highest known endogenous production. This is self-experimentation, not optimization. With practically every other biological parameter there are U-shaped mortality curves. I don't view the long-term safety data on steroid (ab)use as so solid that I'd want to operate in that realm for years. Maybe the known health markers don't tell the whole story. I'm sure a lot of smokers felt great until the lung cancer diagnosis. Not saying the risk is comparable, but don't pretend it's zero and then attack someone for suggesting otherwise.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Cataceous, post: 170735, member: 38109"] Considering that the testosterone is bioidentical, I'd say the burden of proof is on those saying something different is happening. So you sample at least every hour to ensure you're finding the peak? No? When did you sample? You'd have to be truly extraordinary to have such a low peak testosterone on this dose. It's equivalent to over 300 mg of cypionate per week. Arbitrary definitions. [USER=39869]@Paul M[/USER]'s description is still perfectly reasonable, and he did add the "low dose" qualifier. Don't know why you want to jump on him for that... It's hardly irresponsible to call it what it is, and to question the wisdom of dosing at three times the highest known endogenous production. This is self-experimentation, not optimization. With practically every other biological parameter there are U-shaped mortality curves. I don't view the long-term safety data on steroid (ab)use as so solid that I'd want to operate in that realm for years. Maybe the known health markers don't tell the whole story. I'm sure a lot of smokers felt great until the lung cancer diagnosis. Not saying the risk is comparable, but don't pretend it's zero and then attack someone for suggesting otherwise. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Share this page
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Sponsors
Forums
Clinical Use of Anabolics and Hormones
Clinical Use of Anabolics and Hormones
Nandrolone Experiences
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top