ARIMIDEX vs AROMASIN...massg/OTHERS

[MR. BMJ]

I'm going to quote macrophage69alpha on this question in regards to estrogen suppression comparisons:

when it comes to this comparison its more about type of estrogen suppression as opposed to "strength". Arimidex is a VERY potent sulfatase inhibitor, which inhibits estrone. It is a moderately strong aromatase inhibitor (weak as compared to aromasin or letrozole). This is fine for women with breast cancer who produce percentage wise very high levels of estrone (the weak estrogen), which can be converted to estradiol (the strong estrogen) via aromatase.

For men this is generally not very good, especially for men on TRT since sulfatase inhibitors have very little effect on exogenous testosterone. Actually its generally not a good thing since it nearly completely eliminates estrone, while still allowing estradiol. If you have a choice as a man, you want estrone (weak estrogen) with near total elimination of estradiol (strong). Aromasin does inhibit sulfatase, though to a lesser extent than the competitive inhibitors (dex and letro). They are both potent aromatase inhibitors and highly suppress estradiol. Since exogenous test converts to estradiol via aromatase, aromasin is much better suited.

I really doubt any drop in IGF from nolva will do much damage to those following the plans that many use

In regards to cholesterol, this will vary as well, but for the majority I have witnessed, Aromasin is more forgiving on the HDL levels. Arimidex will lower HDL for many, and Letrozole ill murder it...lol.

That being stated Paul Bunyan would be correct in that there is other factors involved in HDL/LDL fluctuations, primarily the type of AAS being used and diet, that will also effect HDL/cholesterol levels.

BMJ

 

[Jacked & Juiced]

Ill do some more research on aromasin but I already looked into it and side effects and because it is steroidal (which adex is not) the side effects are greater...Aromasin is also stronger as mentioned above whihc sometimes isnt warranted when you are looking to use the least amount possible. I dont take adex for fun, just to block estrogen build up etc.

 

[Jacked & Juiced]

aromasin is steroidal. Adex is not. When you have breast cancer and they 1st prescribe you nolva and if that doesnt work than they give you adex. And if that doesnt work you go on to aromasin or letro etc. Thats cause they prefer to give you nonsteroidal compounds (adex) vs steroidal compunds (armosain) 1st to see if its sufficent enough to solve issue with least amount of side effects. What ever works with giving you the least harshest compound. O and yes I have seen the study from ag guys and that is why aromasin costs more-its more expensive to produce-so they raise the price-duhhhh. Its like anavar or primo just becuase it costs more doesnt mean its better at a job!

 

[hellraiser27]

I'm going to quote macrophage69alpha on this question in regards to estrogen suppression comparisons:



I really doubt any drop in IGF from nolva will do much damage to those following the plans that many use

In regards to cholesterol, this will vary as well, but for the majority I have witnessed, Aromasin is more forgiving on the HDL levels. Arimidex will lower HDL for many, and Letrozole ill murder it...lol.

That being stated Paul Bunyan would be correct in that there is other factors involved in HDL/LDL fluctuations, primarily the type of AAS being used and diet, that will also effect HDL/cholesterol levels.

BMJ

I agree with everything said here. I can say from experience aromasin works great. And I have never felt or noticed any sides from it. I have had blood work while on cycle using aromasin hdl/ldl levels were on target.
I also use nolva during cycle if I get a flare up.
I have used nolva for years. I swear by it. I wont start a cycle without it.
It is not going to lower your igf to any noticable degree if any at all.
I have said it so many times; Having bitch tits does not equal gains! Nolva will get rid of gyno quicker than anything!
In fact I took some today. Nope, I'm not getting any smaller. Nope I'm not any weaker. Nope, I don't have bitch tits.

 

[Fa Seeshus]

Ill do some more research on aromasin but I already looked into it and side effects and because it is steroidal (which adex is not) the side effects are greater...Aromasin is also stronger as mentioned above whihc sometimes isnt warranted when you are looking to use the least amount possible. I dont take adex for fun, just to block estrogen build up etc.

this logic makes no sense. please just trust the people who have used aromasin... espec those such as me who have had bloodwork done on it. you are engaging in mental masturbation

 

[Jacked & Juiced]

Read my post above this as i went into detail from a dr point of view with perscribing meds.... Come back and post with proof!!!! I have provided you with a key search criteria steroidal ai's vs non steroidal ai's....Do a serach and than find out! Point of on cycle ai's usage is estrogen suppression to a certain degree. though not too much....Use as little as possible with something as light as possible THAT WORKS AND GETS JOB DONE! Point Blank!
P.s.-we have all used armosain, adex, nolva, clomid, etc and have diff opinions about them-some work better for certian people.....Some people may argue that they use chrysin as a estrogen suppression on cycle and it works fine and great blood work too. This doesnt prove or disprove the point though. Why use a steroidal ai when its not needed depending on cycle/dosage? But lets take it a step back and search for side effects of steroidal ai's and non steroidal ai's...

Aromasin (exemestane) is different from the other aromatse inhibitors in that it is steroid based. It bonds with the aromatse cells permanently and keeps them from turning into estrogens. There is an excellent article on the three drugs in "Mamm" magazine. I couln't find my copy of it but I believe it was in Sept or Oct of 2007.

D-block~

 

[Jacked & Juiced]

Most doctors feel that Arimidex, which is the "weakest" of the three, actually provides some added benefit by NOT suppressing as much aromatase. They feel that a tiny bit of estrogen in your body is better than none at all. They claim that it doesn't increase your risk of recurrence, and provides other health benefits. So they'll recommend Arimidex ahead of Femara or Aromasin.

As far as FDA approvals go, Arimidex is approved for women with breast cancer that hasn't metastasized past the lymph nodes (early stage disease). Femara is approved for women with early stage disease who've completed 5 years of tamoxifen. And Aromasin has FDA approval for women with early-stage cancer who've completed 2-3 years of tamoxifen; and for women with metastatic cancer who haven't responded to others.


Although squirl man may need a stronger ai due to all those nuts hes got in his mouth~

 

[Jacked & Juiced]

aromison can actually down regulate the recepetor response for producing estrogen and can cause you body to permantly produce less estrogen......I like Arimidex, but for long term use its a its hard on your cholesterol levels and raises your bad cholesterol and lowers your good cholesterol---letro is awesome it raises you IGF-1 levels like crazy and can make you very tired throughout the day----nolva is great to use but it just takes the receptor space up that estrogen uses and doesnt actually stop the estrogen production ---it also lowers IGF-1 in the body which can suck if you use it for more then 6 weeks

 

[GoneForever]

I wasnt aware that "anything" could permanently lower estro levels even when stopping use. I would presume you would need to stay on aromasin for a very very long time(as in years) for this to occur.

 

[Jacked & Juiced]

lot has been made about differences in chemical structure, differences in whether a compound is steroidal, such as Aromasin, or non-steroidal such as Femara. Much has been made about how much these compounds suppress estrogen production, and whether they block the enzyme in the reversible or irreversible fashion.

But the reality is that there is no direct clinical evidence demonstrating in a head-to-head comparison (a study that directly compares one drug to the other) that any one of these drugs is superior to any other. Most oncologists tend to select the aromatase inhibitor that has been studied in a particular setting. It may also be affected by whether those clinicians have been involved in some of those studies.

For example, in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients who are post-menopausal, people tend to choose either tamoxifen or Arimidex or Femara because Arimidex and Femara have been studied in post-menopausal women and shown to be better than tamoxifen and with a better safety profile. If a woman has been on tamoxifen for two to three years and she and her oncologist are considering switching, most would switch to either Aromasin or Arimidex because clinical trials with these two drugs did exactly that.

Women going on an aromatase inhibitor after five years of tamoxifen tend to be recommended Femara because the MA-17 trial did exactly that. So most people tend to be clinical trial based and use the results of clinical trials to make decisions in their practice. But there is no direct comparison between these three drugs.

 

[Jacked & Juiced]

I believe this is a great read for concerning this issue. (However I prefer chem one over ag due to price)

**broken link removed**

 

[Jacked & Juiced]

Although the currently approved "third-generation" AIs all powerfully inhibit estrogen synthesis, they may be subdivided into steroidal and nonsteroidal inhibitors, which interact with the aromatase enzyme differently. Nonsteroidal AIs bind noncovalently and reversibly to the aromatase protein, whereas steroidal AIs may bind covalently and irreversibly to the aromatase enzyme. The steroidal AI exemestane can also exert androgenic effects.

 

[Jacked & Juiced]

aromison can actually down regulate the recepetor response for producing estrogen and can cause you body to permantly produce less estrogen

 

[Jacked & Juiced]

Univ of western new england college says diff....biomedical engineer....

 

[Jacked & Juiced]

At this point I have VARIOUS studies over the intenet and I have come to the conclusion without any further RECENT data it is hard to come to a conclusion. Some will argue exemestane works differently. it does not stop the body from producing estrogen. rather, it makes it so the estrogen is unable to bind to receptors by deactivating the binding enzyme. if the estrogen cannot bind, you simply will not get bloated or get gyno. the estrogen is crippled due to exemestane. however, since the estrogen is still floating around, it will not negatively affect your lipid/cholesterol profile. Other studies claim that it had indefinately slowed estrogen regenration or generation. Maybe these stuides were done with only a 2 yr span. The truth is will all these studies and all these people using the stuff we may never know. Alot of studies contradict each other and alll doubt the "controlled envirmonet" being used in each situation. Grey line area.

 

[hellraiser27]

At this point I have VARIOUS studies over the intenet and I have come to the conclusion without any further RECENT data it is hard to come to a conclusion. Some will argue exemestane works differently. it does not stop the body from producing estrogen. rather, it makes it so the estrogen is unable to bind to receptors by deactivating the binding enzyme. if the estrogen cannot bind, you simply will not get bloated or get gyno. the estrogen is crippled due to exemestane. however, since the estrogen is still floating around, it will not negatively affect your lipid/cholesterol profile. Other studies claim that it had indefinately slowed estrogen regenration or generation. Maybe these stuides were done with only a 2 yr span. The truth is will all these studies and all these people using the stuff we may never know. Alot of studies contradict each other and alll doubt the "controlled envirmonet" being used in each situation. Grey line area.

OK this I agree with. Now, I think your over thinking the exemestane AI steroidal thing.
Exactly, the estrogen is still there and there is no way to get gyno. That is why I think exemestane is superior to letro or armidex.

How long and at what dosages would you have to take exemestane to get this down grade of estrogen as you call it?

Like I have said before. I had my blood tested while on cycle and using exemestane and my ldl/hdl levels where in normal range.

 

[GoneForever]

Nothing can permanently lower estrogen. This is crazy. Its like saying if you took test for years, your test would permantely be high since you were taking a high dose. If your keeping your estro low by a supplement, when you stop the supplement your estro will go back to what it used to be. Maybe you may have a slight rebound period where its "higher" than normal till it adjusts, but staying "low" just doesnt make sense. If this were the case then Dr.'s would have had a pill out by now for breat cancer that permanetly causes estro to be low by only taking it for a specific period of time.

 

[MR. BMJ]

Univ of western new england college says diff....biomedical engineer....

Please post this study, an abstract will do.

I'd be interested to see this.

BMJ

 

[Fa Seeshus]

If you are worried about progesterone than use proviron. Never use nolva during cycle as it lowers your igf. Why would you want to do that when we want to build muscle on cycle?......Thats why you stick with as low dose of adex (Arimidex) on cycle and nolva for pct......I hear people running things sronger but would you need to if nolva does the trick. Asides its probably lightest one (side effect) wise than all the ai's and serms......Just my 2 cents but did tons of research all over!

i guess my issue with your posts is that you are stating some things you read as if they are undisputable fact. yet some of these statements are sorta off base.

for "progesterone" based sides (which can actually come from prolactin elevation), you would use cabergoline. i have no idea where you got the idea that proviron combats prolactin.

also i have seen plenty of people use nolva on cycle and still gain muscle. when i use it i also use igf-1 to offset any inhibition of natural igf-1.

this forum is for intelligent discussion and debate. if you choose to unquestionable believe things in certain studies you choose to read, then by all means do so. i think it is incredibly silly to take these studies over the in the trenches experience of tons of users. you are really just shutting yourself off to good advice. that is too bad.

 

[Jacked & Juiced]

Fasheeshus-
I guess my issue with your posts is that you are stating some things you read as if they are undisputable fact. yet some of these statements are sorta off base.

for "progesterone" based sides (which can actually come from prolactin elevation), you would use cabergoline. i have no idea where you got the idea that proviron combats prolactin.

also i have seen plenty of people use nolva on cycle and still gain muscle. when i use it i also use igf-1 to offset any inhibition of natural igf-1.

this forum is for intelligent discussion and debate. if you choose to unquestionable believe things in certain studies you choose to read, then by all means do so. i think it is incredibly silly to take these studies over the in the trenches experience of tons of users. you are really just shutting yourself off to good advice. that is too bad.





You must of not read a few posts back where I said there is contradicting info out there. Are you really that upset that you get all defensive because im not taking your advice. As for the nolva on cycle it’s up to you-As ive done it before on cycle also when nothing else I could get in time. Test raises igf levels and nolva will lower. The amount of dosage taken for this to happen and over how long I do not know. I just avoid potential negatitive things if I can. I have had blood work done after cycle using adex and my hdl/ldl were just fine too.