help

***PScarb*** · 10-02-2008, 01:57 PM

ironclad i can understand that you think you are researching mate but for you to say that Sus250 is a fast ester speaks volumes to me that you have been researching the wrong things on the wrong site...

as Pikey has pointed out Sus is a multi ester test ranging from the prop (3-4 days) to the undeconaete(18 days) sus can be taken once or twice a week any more than this is pointless.

Fat Boy is bang on with his suggestion and that is to just use one steroid on your first course Sus 250 at 250mg - 500mg per week this will give some good results if you are eating enough cals to grow.

**Bodyworks** · 11-02-2008, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ironclad

Believe me i am reserching practically everyday, if i wasn't i'd have pinned by now. But i'm no fool. I DO have all i need to complete a simple cycle but after good advice i am putting it on hold, as i have already stated.
The information i shared with the OP seems to me simple advice, get yourself healthy before thinking about a cycle. I don't have full knowledge of ALL steroids, but what little i do know i am happy to share and have criticis (= learning). So i have to ask you this BW; why have you made this unhelpful remark about my post? In one stroke you have circled my post and added a blunt remark which makes everything i've said seem rubbish. You have neither helped me understand where i've made a mistake (if indeed i have), nor have you helped the OP. Who prob now thinks my advice is useless.
First off, explain your comment; then why don't YOU give dec-man some of your wisdom.

sorry if i was abrupt. i'll explain my comment as you ordered. as paul and pikey suggested your understand of sustanon is well off. your understanding of what gyno is and how it's caused is also misplaced. your comment on 'muscling up' to burn off excess bodyfat is also misplaced. so the 3 points you raised were in fact, of no use to anyone. i'll happily take the pepsi challenge if you wanna ask me a specific question, i'll try my best to answer it if i can. maybe i should have gone through my exceptions to your post in detail, but i didn't have time sorry dude.

Ironclad · 11-02-2008, 08:15 PM

I despair... all i tried to do was get the guy thinking about his high BF% before giving the sustanon a try. Bodyworks, once again you have made a sweeping statement with no follow-up explanation. Everytime you make a post in the future I could simply respond; "you need to read up more". And i would always be right, why? Because everybody, even the pros keeps reserching to keep up. You statement is as poor as you say mine is. Also, you were asked a specific Q. I think it is answers you are lacking, not time.
"... sus can be taken once or twice a week any more than this is pointless."; this is, according to my reading, not quite right. But not wrong either, it seems to be dose dependant. Those choosing 250sustanon once a week (so i read) may make good gains from this alone, but the diet has to be spot-on. However, many many folk i have spoken to and read old posts elsewere seem to agree that; despite the blend of:- propionate 30mg (2 days); phenylpropionate 30mg (4 days); isocaproate 60mg (9 days); decanoate 100mg (15 days) there are fast-acting esters present. So, to avoid test-level spikes (and here we get back to the gyno, again) i seem many prefer to shoot this EOD or E3D. No matter how much you're going to use pre week (250-500mg tho, is a favoured number..) Although one fella says he experimented and found, for him E8D (!) suited him, but only when using 1500mg or more per shot.
I'll get to high BF% giving an increased incidence of gyno another time (im now out of time lol), but pikeys post is enough i think.
Ps bodyworks i am sorry my earlier post seems off, i actually did get out of bed the wrong side that day, but i found your remark unhelpful

***PScarb*** · 11-02-2008, 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ironclad

despite the blend of:- propionate 30mg (2 days); phenylpropionate 30mg (4 days); isocaproate 60mg (9 days); decanoate 100mg (15 days) there are fast-acting esters present. So, to avoid test-level spikes (and here we get back to the gyno, again) i seem many prefer to shoot this EOD or E3D. No matter how much you're going to use pre week (250-500mg tho, is a favoured number..)

sorry to say mate but this is not true you cannot avoid test spikes with sus250 no matter how you dose it you could take it every hour and you would still have spikes. eod or ed use is pointless as you get no more benefit from it no matter the dose.
you are slightly off on your half life days aswell-
Prop 4.5 days
Enan 10.5 days
Cyp 12 days
Undeconate(Nebido) 16.5 days

I did the calculations based on 4 popular injection frequency using 6ml of sus per week over a 4 week duration this is what i found.
Methods used:
ED - 1ml jabbed Mon - Sat.
EOD - 2ml injected Mon/Wed/Fri.
Twice weekly - 3ml injected Mon & Thur.
Once a week - 6ml injected once a week on the Sunday of each week.

ED method/EOD Method/Twice weekly Method - I have grouped these methods together as the results are very similar although the twice weekly method had the highest blood concentration of the three.
there is no stability in blood levels over the 4 weeks with the highest concentration being in the 4th week for all 3, Blood levels will be low enough to start PCT at the end of week 7 begining of week 8.....

Once a week method - Although on a daily basis non of the methods had blood levels stable this method gave similar levels in weeks 3 and 4 it also had the highest concentration than the other 3 methods.
Blood levels are low enough to begin PCT at the end of week 6 and begining of week 7 which is a week earlier than the other 3.

unfortunatly the word files i have the results on is to big to be attached but you can see from the above once a week or twice a week is all you need when using Sus.

Ironclad · 11-02-2008, 11:28 PM

Well thats fair enough Pscarb, and a good read! I must point out tho, i did state one guys opinion was that in larger doses (he 1500mg; you, same) the EOD or E3D jab is unnecessary. We made similar findings at this dose, no? Have you checked these findings against lower dosages, the doses OP originally described? This is where things change, it could be said.
Perhaps there are as many views on injection times as there are different types of sustanon... heres another one lol :- "50mg propionate, 50mg phenylpropionate , 50mg acetate, 90mg cypionante".
I'm going to hang my gloves up here, i feel i have totally hijacked this poor guys thread now. Perhaps i could have given a better 1st reply to this thread, but hey it's thrown up some debate eh! Sorry to anyone offended...

***PScarb*** · 12-02-2008, 08:58 AM

there is no apology necessary mate as debate is always welcomed i agree on your first post but you have apologised for that so no harm done.

lower amounts of sus do not result in different findings the issue with Sus is that many believe it should be injected frequently because of the Prop contained in it although Sus250 only contains 30mg which is very very low.

The different type of Sus you speak of is an UG brand and their are many out their but these are just multi ester blends i can only speak of original Sus as that was what i coded into the macro to get the results, i suppose i could do it with this type but i cannot see the point as this would definitely be faster as the bulk of the esters are faster than original sus.

**Tall** · 12-02-2008, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ironclad

I despair... all i tried to do was get the guy thinking about his high BF% before giving the sustanon a try. Bodyworks, once again you have made a sweeping statement with no follow-up explanation. Everytime you make a post in the future I could simply respond; "you need to read up more". And i would always be right, why? Because everybody, even the pros keeps reserching to keep up. You statement is as poor as you say mine is. Also, you were asked a specific Q. I think it is answers you are lacking, not time.

Ironclad... Shane has offered to answered answer any question you care to ask him:

Quote:

i'll happily take the pepsi challenge if you wanna ask me a specific question, i'll try my best to answer it if i can

I think its perhaps a good idea for you to "hang up your gloves" here as you are clearly boxing above your weight...

But if you do have any questions - then DO ask them. There are alot of good guys on here with alot of knowledge. Everyone is hear to learn, and no one was born with the knowledge they have now - it came as a result of time and effort, trial and error.

Ironclad · 12-02-2008, 04:10 PM

Thats very amusing Tall, a well thought out insult. Good work.
Ok, seeing as you won't let this alone...
Originally i suggested (little more) to the OP that he lowered his BF% to decrease the likelyhood of any gyno occuring, thats advice I have been given and right or wrong seems sensible. This was pretty much shot down in flames and taken further than necessary by BW; rather cheesed off by this i asked BW to explain what he thought was wrong and why and invited him to offer some advice on this BF% question to OP (and me, i'm interseted to know). Now is this or is this not a question??
I also mentioned (but gave no details) that 'there is a school of thought that says if you can increase your muscle size this may help to burn fat, to support this extra muscle'; now ok, sure, this is quite possibly crud but should have opened a debate. Again, when this was rubbished there was no explanation, i asked for one. Now is this or is this not a question??
The twice weekly shots of sustanon is also advice i see given around many forums. As pscarb and i have fully discussed this is prob not truelly necessarily, but is by no means harmful. Fatboy likes his once a week, others i have spoken to like once a week at high doses, many others say to split up the doses. I was just trying to get the OP thinking and open the door to others ideas to help this dude. However, instead i got an ear-full. To be told i am not reserching is wrong, i have just seen different views. None of which are harmful, just a differing opinion. Fatboy, Pikey and Pscarb are happy with their view/experiance, and i like what they've said. It make sense.
My suggestion to OP was knocked, but explained. No question here.
I DO agree with you, there are good informative folk on this board and its a great place to share views, get educated and make friends. But i also notice there are (sadly) some who have little more than smart-alec remarks to make, or blunt uninformative comments that help no-one.
Now Tall, am i still punching above my weight? Would you like to grind this out more, or shall we start a new thread so you can input your experiance of 'trial and error'?

Lets be friend eh ! (i'm starting a new thread tonight, see you there?)

**Tall** · 12-02-2008, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ironclad

Thats very amusing Tall, a well thought out insult. Good work.

It was more of an anecdotal wittiscism as opposed to an insult - I see a recurring pattern of taking things personally here. I'll use more smileys in future... Oh wait I did that time.... Hmmm.....

The boxing above your weight was more a reference to arguing the toss with Shane and inferring he would be unable to answer your questions about steroid use (mainly the part when you referred to his lack of answers)

Ok, seeing as you won't let this alone...

I thought I had... But okay....

Originally i suggested (little more) to the OP that he lowered his BF% to decrease the likelyhood of any gyno occuring, thats advice I have been given and right or wrong seems sensible.

BF% is related more to lipid storage in the adipose tissue. Gynecomastia (Gyno) is a development of the mammory glands (boobs...) in men... Its caused to to an imbalance in the Estrogen / Testosterone ratio as opposed to being caused by eating McDonalds too often...

Consumption of alcohol can affect Estrogen levels causing addition lipid storage in the adipose tissue - but thats another matter.

This was pretty much shot down in flames and taken further than necessary by BW; rather cheesed off by this i asked BW to explain what he thought was wrong and why and invited him to offer some advice on this BF% question to OP (and me, i'm interseted to know). Now is this or is this not a question??
I also mentioned (but gave no details) that 'there is a school of thought that says if you can increase your muscle size this may help to burn fat, to support this extra muscle';

Well it doesn't work like that, but in short increase in LBM will raise your basal metabolic rate meaning you naturally burn more calories. That doesn't mean however that you will burn more fat just by having more muscle. You need to play your body into a state in which it burns fat (not that easy) and to maintain the increased LBM you need to consume more calories.

now ok, sure, this is quite possibly crud but should have opened a debate.

Now... If someone told you the Blue Nissan sat on your drive was actually a Pink Peugoet would you start a debate with them over prismic colour refraction or ask them to look again....?

Again, when this was rubbished there was no explanation, i asked for one. Now is this or is this not a question??

The twice weekly shots of sustanon is also advice i see given around many forums.

As I read it the main issue was taken with you saying Sust250 was a short life esther, where as as Pikey pointed out its a mix of short, medium and slow releasing. Sust250 protocols will vary based on dosage and training...

As pscarb and i have fully discussed this is prob not truelly necessarily, but is by no means harmful. Fatboy likes his once a week, others i have spoken to like once a week at high doses, many others say to split up the doses. I was just trying to get the OP thinking and open the door to others ideas to help this dude. However, instead i got an ear-full.

If you think that was an earful then you are either over sensitive or need to stick around here longer and see some of the real barneys we have.

To be told i am not reserching is wrong, i have just seen different views.

No one said you hadn't researched... Just that you needed to do more research for both your own safety and the safety of others when you are offering incorrect advice on a controlled substance....

None of which are harmful, just a differing opinion. Fatboy, Pikey and Pscarb are happy with their view/experiance, and i like what they've said. It make sense.
My suggestion to OP was knocked, but explained. No question here.
I DO agree with you, there are good informative folk on this board and its a great place to share views, get educated and make friends. But i also notice there are (sadly) some who have little more than smart-alec remarks to make, or blunt uninformative comments that help no-one.

Well things can be dressed up and explained point by point which takes forever or put bluntly... I don't really think anyone bar me has made any smart alec remarks on the thread - but thats only cos you set me up with the gloves comment...

Now Tall, am i still punching above my weight?

With me or with Shane....? Shane is a walking encyclopedia on chemicals.

Would you like to grind this out more, or shall we start a new thread so you can input your experiance of 'trial and error'?

Lets be friend eh ! (i'm starting a new thread tonight, see you there?)

I love the internet me. Hopefully the above responses show you what you could have gone and looked up.

Comments in red above

Ironclad · 12-02-2008, 06:00 PM

Your red comments..
1st, ok, my bad. i apologise for mistaking pointed whittisism as insult
1st (pt2), im not doubting shanes (BW?) qualifications, i asked for him to back-up his remark on my suggestion. To 'prove what you say'. And 'share your wisdom'. There certainly was a void of answers, but i didn't for a moment think he couldn't answer them, this wasn't a challenge and i don't / didn't want a fight. I'd prob lose (but be educated).
3rd, we'll look into this on another thread shall we, i've seen your conclusion btw and when more people respond later i'll give my view...
4th, have already said this is just a view and not necessarily true
5th, now you are just being daft
6th, you have only re-stated what i have recently said here. But, ok my original post was somewhat lacking in depth. I ment to say something like 'because there are fast acting- short life tests in sustanon' etc etc.
7th, sure thing. in future i'll get more into the spirit of things. I said i got up wrong side of bed, apologised, but also said i felt that some explanation was still required (demanded lol, sorry BW)
8th, wrong and right
9th, you correctly identified who i ment! Have a chokky bar (whit j/k)
10th, by this i tried to show you that i can hold my own, and i fully understand that i do NOT have all the answers, all i tried to do was get some response to a sweeping comment 'you know nuffin' (not a quote btw) from the walking encyclopedia.

10-02-2008, 01:57 PM	#11 (permalink)
*PScarb* Super Moderator Super Moderator Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,012 Rep Power:	Re: help ironclad i can understand that you think you are researching mate but for you to say that Sus250 is a fast ester speaks volumes to me that you have been researching the wrong things on the wrong site... as Pikey has pointed out Sus is a multi ester test ranging from the prop (3-4 days) to the undeconaete(18 days) sus can be taken once or twice a week any more than this is pointless. Fat Boy is bang on with his suggestion and that is to just use one steroid on your first course Sus 250 at 250mg - 500mg per week this will give some good results if you are eating enough cals to grow. ______________________ www.omegalabs.co.uk http://www.extremenutrition.co.uk/at...ough/index.php

11-02-2008, 08:15 PM	#13 (permalink)
Ironclad Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: saff of England Posts: 121 Rep Power:	Re: help I despair... all i tried to do was get the guy thinking about his high BF% before giving the sustanon a try. Bodyworks, once again you have made a sweeping statement with no follow-up explanation. Everytime you make a post in the future I could simply respond; "you need to read up more". And i would always be right, why? Because everybody, even the pros keeps reserching to keep up. You statement is as poor as you say mine is. Also, you were asked a specific Q. I think it is answers you are lacking, not time. "... sus can be taken once or twice a week any more than this is pointless."; this is, according to my reading, not quite right. But not wrong either, it seems to be dose dependant. Those choosing 250sustanon once a week (so i read) may make good gains from this alone, but the diet has to be spot-on. However, many many folk i have spoken to and read old posts elsewere seem to agree that; despite the blend of:- propionate 30mg (2 days); phenylpropionate 30mg (4 days); isocaproate 60mg (9 days); decanoate 100mg (15 days) there are fast-acting esters present. So, to avoid test-level spikes (and here we get back to the gyno, again) i seem many prefer to shoot this EOD or E3D. No matter how much you're going to use pre week (250-500mg tho, is a favoured number..) Although one fella says he experimented and found, for him E8D (!) suited him, but only when using 1500mg or more per shot. I'll get to high BF% giving an increased incidence of gyno another time (im now out of time lol), but pikeys post is enough i think. Ps bodyworks i am sorry my earlier post seems off, i actually did get out of bed the wrong side that day, but i found your remark unhelpful

11-02-2008, 11:28 PM	#15 (permalink)
Ironclad Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: saff of England Posts: 121 Rep Power:	Re: help Well thats fair enough Pscarb, and a good read! I must point out tho, i did state one guys opinion was that in larger doses (he 1500mg; you, same) the EOD or E3D jab is unnecessary. We made similar findings at this dose, no? Have you checked these findings against lower dosages, the doses OP originally described? This is where things change, it could be said. Perhaps there are as many views on injection times as there are different types of sustanon... heres another one lol :- "50mg propionate, 50mg phenylpropionate , 50mg acetate, 90mg cypionante". I'm going to hang my gloves up here, i feel i have totally hijacked this poor guys thread now. Perhaps i could have given a better 1st reply to this thread, but hey it's thrown up some debate eh! Sorry to anyone offended...

12-02-2008, 08:58 AM	#16 (permalink)
*PScarb* Super Moderator Super Moderator Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,012 Rep Power:	Re: help there is no apology necessary mate as debate is always welcomed i agree on your first post but you have apologised for that so no harm done. lower amounts of sus do not result in different findings the issue with Sus is that many believe it should be injected frequently because of the Prop contained in it although Sus250 only contains 30mg which is very very low. The different type of Sus you speak of is an UG brand and their are many out their but these are just multi ester blends i can only speak of original Sus as that was what i coded into the macro to get the results, i suppose i could do it with this type but i cannot see the point as this would definitely be faster as the bulk of the esters are faster than original sus. ______________________ www.omegalabs.co.uk http://www.extremenutrition.co.uk/at...ough/index.php

12-02-2008, 04:10 PM	#18 (permalink)
Ironclad Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: saff of England Posts: 121 Rep Power:	pttf... Thats very amusing Tall, a well thought out insult. Good work. Ok, seeing as you won't let this alone... Originally i suggested (little more) to the OP that he lowered his BF% to decrease the likelyhood of any gyno occuring, thats advice I have been given and right or wrong seems sensible. This was pretty much shot down in flames and taken further than necessary by BW; rather cheesed off by this i asked BW to explain what he thought was wrong and why and invited him to offer some advice on this BF% question to OP (and me, i'm interseted to know). Now is this or is this not a question?? I also mentioned (but gave no details) that 'there is a school of thought that says if you can increase your muscle size this may help to burn fat, to support this extra muscle'; now ok, sure, this is quite possibly crud but should have opened a debate. Again, when this was rubbished there was no explanation, i asked for one. Now is this or is this not a question?? The twice weekly shots of sustanon is also advice i see given around many forums. As pscarb and i have fully discussed this is prob not truelly necessarily, but is by no means harmful. Fatboy likes his once a week, others i have spoken to like once a week at high doses, many others say to split up the doses. I was just trying to get the OP thinking and open the door to others ideas to help this dude. However, instead i got an ear-full. To be told i am not reserching is wrong, i have just seen different views. None of which are harmful, just a differing opinion. Fatboy, Pikey and Pscarb are happy with their view/experiance, and i like what they've said. It make sense. My suggestion to OP was knocked, but explained. No question here. I DO agree with you, there are good informative folk on this board and its a great place to share views, get educated and make friends. But i also notice there are (sadly) some who have little more than smart-alec remarks to make, or blunt uninformative comments that help no-one. Now Tall, am i still punching above my weight? Would you like to grind this out more, or shall we start a new thread so you can input your experiance of 'trial and error'? Lets be friend eh ! (i'm starting a new thread tonight, see you there?)

12-02-2008, 06:00 PM	#20 (permalink)
Ironclad Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: saff of England Posts: 121 Rep Power:	Re: help Your red comments.. 1st, ok, my bad. i apologise for mistaking pointed whittisism as insult 1st (pt2), im not doubting shanes (BW?) qualifications, i asked for him to back-up his remark on my suggestion. To 'prove what you say'. And 'share your wisdom'. There certainly was a void of answers, but i didn't for a moment think he couldn't answer them, this wasn't a challenge and i don't / didn't want a fight. I'd prob lose (but be educated). 3rd, we'll look into this on another thread shall we, i've seen your conclusion btw and when more people respond later i'll give my view... 4th, have already said this is just a view and not necessarily true 5th, now you are just being daft 6th, you have only re-stated what i have recently said here. But, ok my original post was somewhat lacking in depth. I ment to say something like 'because there are fast acting- short life tests in sustanon' etc etc. 7th, sure thing. in future i'll get more into the spirit of things. I said i got up wrong side of bed, apologised, but also said i felt that some explanation was still required (demanded lol, sorry BW) 8th, wrong and right 9th, you correctly identified who i ment! Have a chokky bar (whit j/k) 10th, by this i tried to show you that i can hold my own, and i fully understand that i do NOT have all the answers, all i tried to do was get some response to a sweeping comment 'you know nuffin' (not a quote btw) from the walking encyclopedia.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode