Just a bit of Tren

[heavyhitter]

Just curious, since cattle do not train, I guess the tren beefs them up on its own? Would this be similar for other drugs they could use, any idea why tren was selected? Obviously if we took AAS and didn't train we would not bulk up interesting they do.

You wouldn’t bulk up…but you would add some muscle even without training. That’s why they use some AAS for cancer patients

 

[Type-IIx]

@qbkilla from Bhasin 2001 with complete abstention from exercise there was observed a dose-dependent increase in fat-free mass: +0.5 kg (25mg test enanthate), +1.1 kg (50mg), +2.9 (125mg), +5.5 (300mg), +8.9 kg (600mg). Yes, some is water. Not 19.5 lb of it.

 

[cmryan]

@qbkilla from Bhasin 2001 with complete abstention from exercise there was observed a dose-dependent increase in fat-free mass: +0.5 kg (25mg test enanthate), +1.1 kg (50mg), +2.9 (125mg), +5.5 (300mg), +8.9 kg (600mg). Yes, some is water. Not 19.5 lb of it.

Beat me to it.

 

[MightyJohn]

I can tell you that at 100 mgs weekly tren fucking destroys my guts….so it’s definitely doing something

80mg of above weekly and sides are too much for Me(risk vs reward)

 

[qbkilla]

If we took AAS and didn't train we'd still bulk up plenty (muscle). This goes for all androgens, including moderate dose test.

I have to disagree here. Can you give examples of anyone or multiple people who simply took AAS without training or adequate protein and changed their phisque? I could see for muscle wasting. If they were that powerful we could build muscle in a deficit (and that would include training). I know plenty of people who use AAS and don't train hard/right or eat right and literally look like they don't lift and have body fat.

 

[Type-IIx]

I have to disagree here. Can you give examples of anyone or multiple people who simply took AAS without training or adequate protein and changed their phisque? I could see for muscle wasting. If they were that powerful we could build muscle in a deficit (and that would include training). I know plenty of people who use AAS and don't train hard/right or eat right and literally look like they don't lift and have body fat.

Testosterone dose-response relationships in healthy young men. (Bhasin, 2001) (the study referred to by https://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/index.php?threads/just-a-bit-of-tren.170908/post-3077724)

 

[qbkilla]

Testosterone dose-response relationships in healthy young men. (Bhasin, 2001) (the study referred to by https://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/index.php?threads/just-a-bit-of-tren.170908/post-3077724)

I agree in literature taking aas will improve body composition, but in terms of real world visible results? Think of all the people that take AAS and don't look good or gain because they don't train intense, don't recover, eat right. But small changes that can be measured in a scam sure, not arguing against that so maybe we are on the same page

 

[Type-IIx]

I agree in literature taking aas will improve body composition, but in terms of real world visible results? Think of all the people that take AAS and don't look good or gain because they don't train intense, don't recover, eat right. But small changes that can be measured in a scam sure, not arguing against that so maybe we are on the same page

We're on the same page that you're someone that can't be reasoned with and earned a hard to get Ignore from me. Godspeed, "19.5 lb FFM is a small change that doesn't equate to real world visible results" 'killa.

 

[heavyhitter]

I agree in literature taking aas will improve body composition, but in terms of real world visible results? Think of all the people that take AAS and don't look good or gain because they don't train intense, don't recover, eat right. But small changes that can be measured in a scam sure, not arguing against that so maybe we are on the same page

Just imagine what they would have looked like before the aas!

 

[qbkilla]

We're on the same page that you're someone that can't be reasoned with and earned a hard to get Ignore from me. Godspeed, "19.5 lb FFM is a small change that doesn't equate to real world visible results" 'killa.

Sad response I typically enjoy your posts

So if someone started a thread saying their about to jump on 300 mg of tren but don't have time to train or care to adjust their diet I assume your response would be, based on your replies, their going to see some incredible gains. The literature states as such so it must play out like that.

I'd put my money on a natural with good genetics who has his training and dialed in gaining more.

 

[qbkilla]

Just imagine what they would have looked like before the aas!

True lol. We also have to look at examples of people who use high dosages and still look terrible (diet, training, genetics). Typically when we see on forums someone doing a shit load of gear but not looking the part the response is to lower dosages hire a trainer and looks will improve.

 

[Bleed]

It's possible to put on 19.5 lb FFM and still look terrible because you have the worst genetics possible. That's just the way it is.

It cant be argued that if you took someone who never worked out (i didnt see this was the case with the subjects in the study, Im just using it for clarity) and sent them about their day without changing anything, I dont think anyone would be surprised that nothing changed. (If a person put on 19.5 lbs of muscle without anabolics, we'd be asking for their secret.)

You take those same people and gear them up with 600mg of test per week without changing anything else and they will absolutely put on muscle. Maybe not 19.5 but even 5 lbs of muscle is a decent amount of muscle. Throw 5 pounds of beef on a table. Distribute that throughout your body.

The fact that you see people on even higher dosages who look terrible but then people who never took AAS with great genetics who look great doesnt dispel the simple fact that hormones certainly work even when half assing it or not doing much of anything.

The responses people get here telling others to drop their dosages and hire a trainer are because the people posting often times look like they dont train at all or they look unhealthy or theyre trolling. This doesnt mean test doesnt put on muscle with minimal effort. What if the people getting told to higher a trainer already put on a decent amount of muscle but got beat down with horrible genetics? Doesnt mean the test didnt work.

True lol. We also have to look at examples of people who use high dosages and still look terrible (diet, training, genetics). Typically when we see on forums someone doing a shit load of gear but not looking the part the response is to lower dosages hire a trainer and looks will improve.

 

[qbkilla]

It's possible to put on 19.5 lb FFM and still look terrible because you have the worst genetics possible. That's just the way it is.

It cant be argued that if you took someone who never worked out (i didnt see this was the case with the subjects in the study, Im just using it for clarity) and sent them about their day without changing anything, I dont think anyone would be surprised that nothing changed. (If a person put on 19.5 lbs of muscle without anabolics, we'd be asking for their secret.)

You take those same people and gear them up with 600mg of test per week without changing anything else and they will absolutely put on muscle. Maybe not 19.5 but even 5 lbs of muscle is a decent amount of muscle. Throw 5 pounds of beef on a table. Distribute that throughout your body.

The fact that you see people on even higher dosages who look terrible but then people who never took AAS with great genetics who look great doesnt dispel the simple fact that hormones certainly work even when half assing it or not doing much of anything.

The responses people get here telling others to drop their dosages and hire a trainer are because the people posting often times look like they dont train at all or they look unhealthy or theyre trolling. This doesnt mean test doesnt put on muscle with minimal effort. What if the people getting told to higher a trainer already put on a decent amount of muscle but got beat down with horrible genetics? Doesnt mean the test didnt work.

I agree that putting someone who doesn't work out on aas, they will have positive body composition changes. I just don't think they will be visible changes to where anyone would say "are you taking juice, did you start working out" in the absence of a training stimulus.

Then we have to look at diet. We know in order to build tissue or gain weight we need to be in a surplus. If someone is in a defecit and takes tren they may have some recomp affect at first (remember we are assuming they are not working out), but I can't see them building muscle if the calories and protein aren't there and their diet comsits of junk food.

 

[OuchThatHurts]

It's possible to put on 19.5 lb FFM and still look terrible because you have the worst genetics possible. That's just the way it is.

It cant be argued that if you took someone who never worked out (i didnt see this was the case with the subjects in the study, Im just using it for clarity) and sent them about their day without changing anything, I dont think anyone would be surprised that nothing changed. (If a person put on 19.5 lbs of muscle without anabolics, we'd be asking for their secret.)

You take those same people and gear them up with 600mg of test per week without changing anything else and they will absolutely put on muscle. Maybe not 19.5 but even 5 lbs of muscle is a decent amount of muscle. Throw 5 pounds of beef on a table. Distribute that throughout your body.

The fact that you see people on even higher dosages who look terrible but then people who never took AAS with great genetics who look great doesnt dispel the simple fact that hormones certainly work even when half assing it or not doing much of anything.

The responses people get here telling others to drop their dosages and hire a trainer are because the people posting often times look like they dont train at all or they look unhealthy or theyre trolling. This doesnt mean test doesnt put on muscle with minimal effort. What if the people getting told to higher a trainer already put on a decent amount of muscle but got beat down with horrible genetics? Doesnt mean the test didnt work.

Also consider the possibility that their training habits may be so poor that it's actually working against them along with a poor diet and inadequate rest and that the truckload of androgens is the only thing serving to keep them just above water. Many times these are the people that start training and 3 months later just look worse and feel terrible and give up.

All the while they watch another guy come in 2 maybe 3 days a week, less androgens and throws some weights around for a while but then goes home and gets adequate rest and eats good foods. Then they'll say he has great genetics but really it's just that he put some stress on the muscle but had other key components right. While original guy had more than enough androgens and anabolics but absolutely nothing else right - overtrained, malnourished, no rest.

A lot of stars have align to make a person a candidate for growth. AAS and PEDs is just one link in a long line of so many things. Genetics, training, diet, rest, chemicals (PEDs). Training knowledge, training wisdom, and common sense creates muscle combined and proportional to genetic ability. At least that's always been very much my opinion.

Genetics definitely has a big role in it all. But me personally, I try to be careful with that word because it can also be very easily used as a copout. And I think it is more often than we think.

 

[Bleed]

Was Type 2x was saying you would look impressive based on the study? I didnt see that. I think he was merely stating that the efficacy of testosterone for putting on lbm is undeniable.

I see where you are coming from but In the case of tren, I think its entirely possible that you could put on lbm with tren, some junk food, and no training stimulus. Am I recommending it? No. It's essentially the essence of a dumb fucking idea. But anecdotally thousands of times we see tren do what tren does. Guys going hypo without carbs, etc. Granted, as far as i know, there are no studies for tren on human FFM or fat burning effects but we can take the numerous anecdotes and infer plenty about whats possible. We know Tren in general isnt some huge mass builder to begin with. It will put on mass but 9/10 guys here will tell you test is king for off season mass gains.

The only studies on tren are based on feed lot efficiency from what I know and Type 2x did a better job of explaining what you could infer to humans from what we saw from cows in the study.

I dont think anyone here would recommend taking AAS and sitting on your ass and eating shit food but we do have all types here..

I agree that putting someone who doesn't work out on aas, they will have positive body composition changes. I just don't think they will be visible changes to where anyone would say "are you taking juice, did you start working out" in the absence of a training stimulus.

Then we have to look at diet. We know in order to build tissue or gain weight we need to be in a surplus. If someone is in a defecit and takes tren they may have some recomp affect at first (remember we are assuming they are not working out), but I can't see them building muscle if the calories and protein aren't there and their diet comsits of junk food.

 

[Bleed]

I wasnt bowing before the alter of genetics here. Hope it didnt look like that.

I was more or less stating that we are looking at test in the vaccuum of "how effective is it?" which is to say: Very.

At least that was my impression of what we were talking about.

If we are talking about legitimate gains, everything you said is what needs to happen. I was under the impression we were just talking about how effective test was at putting on FFM.

Also consider the possibility that their training habits may be so poor that it's actually working against them along with a poor diet and inadequate rest and that the truckload of androgens is the only thing serving to keep them just above water. Many times these are the people that start training and 3 months later just look worse and feel terrible and give up.

All the while they watch another guy come in 2 maybe 3 days a week, less androgens and throws some weights around for a while but then goes home and gets adequate rest and eats good foods. Then they'll say he has great genetics but really it's just that he put some stress on the muscle but had other key components right. While original guy had more than enough androgens and anabolics but absolutely nothing else right - overtrained, malnourished, no rest.

A lot of stars have align to make a person a candidate for growth. AAS and PEDs is just one link in a long line of so many things. Genetics, training, diet, rest, chemicals (PEDs). Training knowledge, training wisdom, and common sense creates muscle combined and proportional to genetic ability. At least that's always been very much my opinion.

Genetics definitely has a big role in it all. But me personally, I try to be careful with that word because it can also be very easily used as a copout. And I think it is more often than we think.

 

[OuchThatHurts]

I wasnt bowing before the alter of genetics here. Hope it didnt look like that.

I was more or less stating that we are looking at test in the vaccuum of "how effective is it?" which is to say: Very.

At least that was my impression of what we were talking about.

If we are talking about legitimate gains, everything you said is what needs to happen. I was under the impression we were just talking about how effective test was at putting on FFM.

Absolutely. I didn't think you were saying genetics is all. I just posted what I did to add to what you said. Not contradict it. Many eyes that read these threads are the 'I just don't have the genetics for this' and give up. Before they even science it out. Hands up in the air, 'I'm done!" And they walk away. They never even gave it a real chance.

Years later in a bar they'll be saying to me, "I was taking a gram of tren every week and I still could never get huge. I trained for months. Man, this is all a genetics game."

And I'll think, "Have another shot dude, and call a cab," while I finish a plate of wings and a club soda, lean and 230lbs.

 

[Rep]

Ive run this at small doses in the past and it was very effective for many reasons. The mental aspect (short patience) was my issue and the night sweats killed me.
If you can run and handle the short patience and other agressive issues that some people have, then go for it and report back. I did prefer the tren ace also. There was a super tren concentrate at one point. 350mg/cc. It was awesome but I haven't seen it that concentrated since. Thanks for memory lane though!

 

[Gym-Rat]

Ive run this at small doses in the past and it was very effective for many reasons. The mental aspect (short patience) was my issue and the night sweats killed me.
If you can run and handle the short patience and other agressive issues that some people have, then go for it and report back. I did prefer the tren ace also. There was a super tren concentrate at one point. 350mg/cc. It was awesome but I haven't seen it that concentrated since. Thanks for memory lane though!

Thx rep... I noticed like today (not a pin day) my patience seems better. Makes sense I guess right? Tomorrow on pin-day, I'll see how I behave as far as patience is concerned.
Maybe it affects me more on those days, which would make sense. Its definitely do-able (dealing with this), only a tiny nuisance. I dont have any aggression really, just the lack of patience mentioned (for those that Im not real fond of).
Other than that everything else feels great. Strength, libido thru the roof, etc. (The tiny bit of irritability and small amount anxiety is bearable). Thx for all of your replies...

 

[qbkilla]

Was Type 2x was saying you would look impressive based on the study? I didnt see that. I think he was merely stating that the efficacy of testosterone for putting on lbm is undeniable.

I see where you are coming from but In the case of tren, I think its entirely possible that you could put on lbm with tren, some junk food, and no training stimulus. Am I recommending it? No. It's essentially the essence of a dumb fucking idea. But anecdotally thousands of times we see tren do what tren does. Guys going hypo without carbs, etc. Granted, as far as i know, there are no studies for tren on human FFM or fat burning effects but we can take the numerous anecdotes and infer plenty about whats possible. We know Tren in general isnt some huge mass builder to begin with. It will put on mass but 9/10 guys here will tell you test is king for off season mass gains.

The only studies on tren are based on feed lot efficiency from what I know and Type 2x did a better job of explaining what you could infer to humans from what we saw from cows in the study.

I dont think anyone here would recommend taking AAS and sitting on your ass and eating shit food but we do have all types here..

I think we are in agreement. Your first statement is what I was trying to get from him until he said he was ignoring me not sure what about my response triggered that reaction.

I was also trying to see to what degree cattle are able to add mass simply by adding tren, I would assume s good bit. One thing to keep in mind I believe when it is given to them it's with estrogen. I know little about cattle so I also assume they are still growing ( age) when they take it and eat as much as they want. So those are other factors, a surplus is present and they are given it before they are fully grown.