Im not a big study guy. Im more of a real world results/ anecdotes guy. I care more about what is actually happening to guys when using these compounds, vs what flawed/ corrupt studies tell us what should happen. But it’s important to have people like u that put more weight into study results. So I definitely can appreciate the way u approach these things
I‘m not really sure what ur trying to say, in regards to masteron and breast cancer. All I know is Masteron was trialed on breast cancer patients. Like I said, that’s where the prefix “mast” comes from. If ur research reveals something different, we have to agree to disagree. But a quick google search will pull up multiple studies on the subject. So I’m not sure how it’s even arguable that at one point masteron was used in breast cancer patients. It’s not a current treatment for breast cancer, at least not that I’m aware of, so clearly it either wasn’t that great at treating breast cancer, or there wasn’t enough money in it to compete with modern methods to treat breast cancer that are much more profitable.
And idk what the studies on primo show. All I know is everyone that takes it will see a drop in E2. Obv that drop is going to be dependent on how many mgs of primo they’re using. For me personally, it’s a pretty potent ai. And that’s what I usually see in bloodwork from other men using it as well. Some men obv see less E2 inhibition than others. But everyone that I’ve seen use it has seen E2 decrease to some degree in their labs
and idk what studies show, but anecdotal reports and bloodwork that I’ve seen tends to show that prolactin follows E2. So when E2 goes up, prolactin in bloodwork tends to rise as well. And when E2 decreases in bloodwork, I tend to see prolactin drop as well.
If studies show u different things than what men are seeing anecdotally when using these compounds, we just have to agree to disagree, and that’s ok imo.
