An this last graph is exactly what I was talking about. Te levels of the e3d will NEVER. Be reached on and ed schedule.
Yeah, and the levels on the ED schedule will never DROP as LOW as they do on the E3D schedule. And there are three more peaks in the ED schedule. Three more times it peaks out -- 11 versus 8.
And which do you think gives better gains? More or less drugs?
It's the same amount of drugs. E3D reaches a higher concentration during its peaks which occur less often than the ED, and when it drops it almost drops as low as it peaked relatively speaking. That would almost be reason enough to consider it, the fact that it doesn't drop quite as low as it does peak when it gets high. BUT, it all evens out when you notice there are three more peaks in the ED schedule.
In otherwords if you took both these lines and stretched them out to account for the peaks and valleys and compared them side by side, the difference would be marginal at best.
And I am not defending either side here. I actually believe that steady state is not the optimal format for dosing hormones. But I also think that the peaks and valleys we should be after happen on a 24 hour cycle, not over a period of weeks or months.
Another thing we have to consider is activation of the AR and the genetic switches that are flipped due to this. Just because we achieve a higher peak level of hormone does not mean there is an overall more dramatic response of increasing RNA replication and the other epi-genetic changes that occur upon activation of the AR. There is a reason it takes months to see solid results, and that really doesn't have anything to do with the fact that esters take a while to cleave. It has to do with how quickly the underlying machinery involved in muscle protein synthesis is triggered and optimized once the AR is activated.
We can clearly see that the skin does not take long at all to produce side effects upon exposure to the AR activation within it. Zits and oily skin come quick. But the production of new muscle tissue takes a much longer time, regardless of how hard you hit the AR.
I'm not trying to start a pissing contest. I think Lucians information is really useful in a lot of ways. I also think that some of the reasoning of this is a bit short-sighted, because it's not taking into account the time it takes for nuclear changes to occur.
Hell we still don't really even know the saturation point of the androgen receptors. For instance with JJB, he is taking an astronomical amount of gear. Is he overdoing it? I would imagine so, yes, but that's just armchair science. In other words, he will experience no increased benefits from his protocol simply because he is taking about 1000mg more than his androgen receptors even need. The whole system is lit up like mile-high stadium, regardless of peaks and troughs. Hell, his troughs are higher than my peaks!!!
Again, just to be clear, I think Lucian has highlighted something very much worthwhile. I think this kind of conversation is so much more useful, regardless of the outcome, than these endless threads about some dude's calves or how Tren is the best.
I really appreciate your time and energy, Lucian and I don't mean to challenge your observations out of some agenda. I am simply stating what I notice.
.gif "IP Gear")
And yes, I understand that you can use slin pins at a lower dose via sub-q (I don't recommend this with oils) or smaller muscle groups, but I'll stick with IM to the glutes. Just a personal preference. 
