• All new members please introduce your self here and welcome to the board:
    http://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/showthread.php?t=259
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
M4B Store Banner
intex
Riptropin Store banner
Generation X Bodybuilding Forum
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Mysupps Store Banner
IP Gear Store Banner
PM-Ace-Labs
Ganabol Store Banner
Spend $100 and get bonus needles free at sterile syringes
Professional Muscle Store open now
sunrise2
PHARMAHGH1
kinglab
ganabol2
Professional Muscle Store open now
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
azteca
granabolic1
napsgear-210x65
advertise1
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
ashp210
UGFREAK-banner-PM
esquel
YMSGIF210x65-Banner
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store

How good can you look on test only?

I Think I am at the point I don't want to compete anymore, but.... I Don't Want to give up on look. Dont get me wrong I am I decent shape year round. I am also not mass monster. Current weight 95 kg at 186 cm in three weeks out conditioning as I did mi mini cut. Not also looking to get bigger. Amount of drugs I used to cut was 50 mg prop e2d and 50mg mast e2d plus 50 winny and some clen at last two weeks. I am thinking doing probably forever 30mg test/day and once per year 8 week cycle. What can I expect from only test assuming that diet is spot on some cardio added and decent physique for years.? I hit 40 years last summer.
you can look as good as the amount you put into your diet/training/ physique. Look at Stan Efferding. He only uses test cream now in his 50s and looks great (assuming hes being honest which i do believe he is). I have dieted down to single digit BF on only test (and peptides) keeping around 215 lbs. Im not a genetic specimen by any means either. Its all about how dedicated you want to be.
 
TRT doses are not gonna give you anywhere near the results of cycles. They are what they are- testosterone replacement therapy for aging males. It’s not much more benefit than someone younger who has a high natural test level. Anyone who is saying that they are seeing dramatic gains on trt doses and that’s it is lying. If so many guys here were using TRT levels the sponsors would be out of business.
Well, there are guys taking 400 mg/ wk and calling that trt.
 
you can look as good as the amount you put into your diet/training/ physique. Look at Stan Efferding. He only uses test cream now in his 50s and looks great (assuming hes being honest which i do believe he is). I have dieted down to single digit BF on only test (and peptides) keeping around 215 lbs. Im not a genetic specimen by any means either. Its all about how dedicated you want to be.
because you know what he uses ... people are so naive and think that someone is telling them the whole truth - it is sad
 
This guy is on test only , true TRT dose to keep levels up close to 1200 as he is subject to testing for work. Absolutely no other drugs used at all except his prescribed Arimadex.
He prep for 20 weeks for his first so
You can get very lean on test alone , shit look at natural competitors , some of them get peeled on nothing.

wouldn’t he cut the test 2-3 weeks out and run adex for the remainder to make sure there was no sub q water ?
 
Any person who claims they can maintain a good looking physique for a long period of time on 200mgs of Test is just a misinformed person. Test alone especially at a trt dose will do nothing for anabolism it will merely replace your natural production possibly at higher levels and that's it. IF that was the case no bodybuilder in their right mind would take more than 2 to 300mgs of test a week in the off season and maintain the same size and/or look. Try it for 6 months to a year and watch yourself shrivel to nothing. I know because I've been through it and I am by no means as big as some of the big boys here.

Well all hate science, cuz science is just a bunch of untrustworthy brain-trusts of imbeciles.

Although, this says differently of your premise that T replacement alone isn't anabolic.

These are everyday nobody Joe's after 56 weeks.

Take from it what you will :)


Effects of testosterone treatment on body fat and lean mass in obese men on a hypocaloric diet: a randomised controlled trial


Abstract Background Whether testosterone treatment has benefits on body composition over and above caloric restriction in men is unknown. We hypothesised that testosterone treatment augments diet-induced loss of fat mass and prevents loss of muscle mass.

Methods We conducted a randomised double-blind, parallel, placebo controlled trial at a tertiary referral centre. A total of 100 obese men (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2) with a total testosterone level of or below 12 nmol/L and a median age of 53 years (interquartile range 47–60) receiving 10 weeks of a very low energy diet (VLED) followed by 46 weeks of weight maintenance were randomly assigned at baseline to 56 weeks of 10-weekly intramuscular testosterone undecanoate (n = 49, cases) or matching placebo (n = 51, controls). The main outcome measures were the between-group difference in fat and lean mass by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and visceral fat area (computed tomography). Results A total of 82 men completed the study. At study end, compared to controls, cases had greater reductions in fat mass, with a mean adjusted between-group difference (MAD) of –2.9 kg (–5.7 to –0.2; P = 0.04), and in visceral fat (MAD –2678 mm2; –5180 to –176; P = 0.04).

Although both groups lost the same lean mass following VLED (cases –3.9 kg (–5.3 to –2.6); controls –4.8 kg (–6.2 to –3.5), P = 0.36), cases regained lean mass (3.3 kg (1.9 to 4.7), P < 0.001) during weight maintenance, in contrast to controls (0.8 kg (–0.7 to 2.3), P = 0.29) so that, at study end, cases had an attenuated reduction in lean mass compared to controls (MAD 3.4 kg (1.3 to 5.5), P = 0.002).

Conclusions While dieting men receiving placebo lost both fat and lean mass, the weight loss with testosterone treatment was almost exclusively due to loss of body fat.

 
Well all hate science, cuz science is just a bunch of untrustworthy brain-trusts of imbeciles.

Although, this says differently of your premise that T replacement alone isn't anabolic.

These are everyday nobody Joe's after 56 weeks.

Take from it what you will :)


Effects of testosterone treatment on body fat and lean mass in obese men on a hypocaloric diet: a randomised controlled trial





The average 40-50 year old man (53 is the median age here) does not have Test levels near 1000. TRT treatment (most) will bring that 40-50 year old man to that 1000 range which basically is an “enhancement” bc most guys that age don’t have levels like that.

Add in strict diet + hard workouts = muscle gain/fat loss

so I completely disagree with whoever said you will shrink on just TRT. The gains might not be drastic and certainly won’t be as big as on say Test/Tren/Primo but don’t see why one can’t make gains on TRT.
 
The average 40-50 year old man (53 is the median age here) does not have Test levels near 1000. TRT treatment (most) will bring that 40-50 year old man to that 1000 range which basically is an “enhancement” bc most guys that age don’t have levels like that.

Add in strict diet + hard workouts = muscle gain/fat loss

so I completely disagree with whoever said you will shrink on just TRT. The gains might not be drastic and certainly won’t be as big as on say Test/Tren/Primo but don’t see why one can’t make gains on TRT.
Being in a 56 week caloric deficit alone speaks volumes on the nature of physiological levels of testosterone on preservation of skeletal muscle tissue via enrichment of anabolism.

Pump in mTOR stimulating supplements to someone that's normocaloric or hypercaloric, I'm sure we can all agree there'd be even more pronounced effects on anabolism.
 
The average 40-50 year old man (53 is the median age here) does not have Test levels near 1000. TRT treatment (most) will bring that 40-50 year old man to that 1000 range which basically is an “enhancement” bc most guys that age don’t have levels like that.

Add in strict diet + hard workouts = muscle gain/fat loss

so I completely disagree with whoever said you will shrink on just TRT. The gains might not be drastic and certainly won’t be as big as on say Test/Tren/Primo but don’t see why one can’t make gains on TRT.
If you have been cycling gear and are 220lbs at 6ft and under 10% bf- no way in hell are you going to maintain that on TRT. Enough with this absolute nonsense.
 
If you have been cycling gear and are 220lbs at 6ft and under 10% bf- no way in hell are you going to maintain that on TRT. Enough with this absolute nonsense.

Why not? Serious question. Why not?
6ft 220, 10 percent BF

I might agree if you said something like 6ft 250, 10 percent BF

It’s not nonsense. Others seem to agree.
 
If you have been cycling gear and are 220lbs at 6ft and under 10% bf- no way in hell are you going to maintain that on TRT. Enough with this absolute nonsense.

and let me add to that by asking you what you think will happen to that 6ft 220, 10 BF?

you think that guy is going to shrink to 180? At 12 BF?

Diet + Training
 
and let me add to that by asking you what you think will happen to that 6ft 220, 10 BF?

you think that guy is going to shrink to 180? At 12 BF?

Diet + Training
I said under 10 percent. It will depend on multiple factors what will happen but you won’t be able to keep the size AND low bf. Do you understand what 6ft abd 220lbs is with under 10% bf? That’s basically BO Jackson in his prime. That’s prime Mike Tyson who was more like 5ft10 but 200lbs in his prime. That’s the Rock now. So yes I guess it’s possible but those are 3 ELITE athletes. You are acting like that is a common gym bro size? Very few guys are that size and BF. May as well believe Mike O’Hearn is Natural
 
I said under 10 percent. It will depend on multiple factors what will happen but you won’t be able to keep the size AND low bf. Do you understand what 6ft abd 220lbs is with under 10% bf? That’s basically BO Jackson in his prime. That’s prime Mike Tyson who was more like 5ft10 but 200lbs in his prime. That’s the Rock now. So yes I guess it’s possible but those are 3 ELITE athletes. You are acting like that is a common gym bro size? Very few guys are that size and BF. May as well believe Mike O’Hearn is Natural

I missed the “under” 10 BF, so my bad. However, how much under 10 BF? Are we talking 9? Or like 6?

The Rock is no way 220 btw. He’s 260. And 6’2

anyway, we are just going to have to disagree here. I think while you won’t hold everything off cycle, you can still maintain the look and even make some gains while not as drastic as on cycle, with proper diet and training.
 
Who care about how much you hold? The question was can you look good on test only? The answer is 100% YES
 
I said under 10 percent. It will depend on multiple factors what will happen but you won’t be able to keep the size AND low bf. Do you understand what 6ft abd 220lbs is with under 10% bf? That’s basically BO Jackson in his prime. That’s prime Mike Tyson who was more like 5ft10 but 200lbs in his prime. That’s the Rock now. So yes I guess it’s possible but those are 3 ELITE athletes. You are acting like that is a common gym bro size? Very few guys are that size and BF. May as well believe Mike O’Hearn is Natural
the biggest AND while at same time leanest i have been i was 5'11" and 220 lbs near competition ready.
i could NEVER do that on 200mg of test only. no way.
thats ME tho... but i highly doubt many in the gene pool can pull that off...
-F
 
Well all hate science, cuz science is just a bunch of untrustworthy brain-trusts of imbeciles.

Although, this says differently of your premise that T replacement alone isn't anabolic.

These are everyday nobody Joe's after 56 weeks.

Take from it what you will :)


Effects of testosterone treatment on body fat and lean mass in obese men on a hypocaloric diet: a randomised controlled trial





Ah yes, that pesky science thing keeps popping it's head up in discussions amongst the bro's. In the current anti-intellectual climate it's a bit like a game of Whack-a-Mole, some of us keep reading and posting the studies, only to be shot down by the bro's who say "I don't care what the science says; I know that (some ridiculous idea) is true!"

To be honest, I am always surprised to see questions like this debated at all, because Shalender Bhasin and others settled this question rather definitely with his groundbreaking series of studies back in the late 1990's and early 2000's, commonly referred to as the "600mg" studies, which are often cited and just as often misinterpreted by those who wish to read into them what they will. I've spoken to Dr Bhasin on many occasions (he is my endocrinologist), and he had two purposes in doing the studies: firstly, to show that test and other steroids work, because of course this was back in the day when bottles of steroids still came labeled with the warning that they provided no athletic benefit. And secondly and more importantly, to show that the results of testosterone and other steroids are dose-dependent.


"This study demonstrates that an increase in circulating testosterone concentrations results in dose-dependent increases in fat-free mass, muscle size, strength, and power. The relationships between circulating testosterone concentrations and changes in fat free mass and muscle size conform to a single log-linear dose-response curve. Our data do not support the notion of two separate dose-response curves reflecting two independent mechanisms of testosterone action on the muscle. Forbes et al. (22) predicted 25 years ago that the muscle mass accretion during androgen administration is related to the cumulative androgen dose, the product of daily dose and treatment duration. Our data are consistent with Forbes’s hypothesis of a linear relationship between testosterone dose and lean mass accretion; however, we do not know whether increasing the treatment duration would lead to further gains in muscle mass."

The guys using low or TRT doses of testosterone got lesser results than the guys using 300 or 600mg per week, and the higher the dose, the better the results. You would think this would be common sense, but it was not yet accepted back in those days.

For what it's worth, Dr. Bhasin is very against using any more than TRT doses of testosterone, and believes that the lower the dose, the better for health. He disagrees with the use of any other steroid other than testosterone at TRT levels. And he knows that he could never replicate these studies today, because it would be considered unethical to give such high doses of testosterone to the test subjects.

To answer the original poster's question "How good can you look on test only?", the answer is, that all depends on the amount of test you are using, and how hard you are working. You can maintain a physique you built with high doses on TRT levels, at least for a while. And of course TRT doses are always going to be better than nothing at all.

All other things being equal (which they never are: training, nutrition, recuperation etc), you are always going to get better results with a higher dose than a lower dose. But you can certainly look good on TRT levels of test only, depending on what your definition of "looking good" may be. Are you going to look like a pro bodybuilder in contest shape? Of course not. But you are certainly going to look better than the average guy on the street, as long as your training and nutrition and recuperation are on point, and of course depending on your own individual genetics. And there are plenty of guys out there, only using TRT doses, who look great, and many others, using TRT doses or higher, who don't look so great.

So as with most things in life, the answer to the original poster's question "How good can you look on test only?" is: "It depends." It depends on the dose, and it depends on you getting all the other pieces of the puzzle in place.
 
Ah yes, that pesky science thing keeps popping it's head up in discussions amongst the bro's. In the current anti-intellectual climate it's a bit like a game of Whack-a-Mole, some of us keep reading and posting the studies, only to be shot down by the bro's who say "I don't care what the science says; I know that (some ridiculous idea) is true!"

To be honest, I am always surprised to see questions like this debated at all, because Shalender Bhasin and others settled this question rather definitely with his groundbreaking series of studies back in the late 1990's and early 2000's, commonly referred to as the "600mg" studies, which are often cited and just as often misinterpreted by those who wish to read into them what they will. I've spoken to Dr Bhasin on many occasions (he is my endocrinologist), and he had two purposes in doing the studies: firstly, to show that test and other steroids work, because of course this was back in the day when bottles of steroids still came labeled with the warning that they provided no athletic benefit. And secondly and more importantly, to show that the results of testosterone and other steroids are dose-dependent.


"This study demonstrates that an increase in circulating testosterone concentrations results in dose-dependent increases in fat-free mass, muscle size, strength, and power. The relationships between circulating testosterone concentrations and changes in fat free mass and muscle size conform to a single log-linear dose-response curve. Our data do not support the notion of two separate dose-response curves reflecting two independent mechanisms of testosterone action on the muscle. Forbes et al. (22) predicted 25 years ago that the muscle mass accretion during androgen administration is related to the cumulative androgen dose, the product of daily dose and treatment duration. Our data are consistent with Forbes’s hypothesis of a linear relationship between testosterone dose and lean mass accretion; however, we do not know whether increasing the treatment duration would lead to further gains in muscle mass."

The guys using low or TRT doses of testosterone got lesser results than the guys using 300 or 600mg per week, and the higher the dose, the better the results. You would think this would be common sense, but it was not yet accepted back in those days.

For what it's worth, Dr. Bhasin is very against using any more than TRT doses of testosterone, and believes that the lower the dose, the better for health. He disagrees with the use of any other steroid other than testosterone at TRT levels. And he knows that he could never replicate these studies today, because it would be considered unethical to give such high doses of testosterone to the test subjects.

To answer the original poster's question "How good can you look on test only?", the answer is, that all depends on the amount of test you are using, and how hard you are working. You can maintain a physique you built with high doses on TRT levels, at least for a while. And of course TRT doses are always going to be better than nothing at all.

All other things being equal (which they never are: training, nutrition, recuperation etc), you are always going to get better results with a higher dose than a lower dose. But you can certainly look good on TRT levels of test only, depending on what your definition of "looking good" may be. Are you going to look like a pro bodybuilder in contest shape? Of course not. But you are certainly going to look better than the average guy on the street, as long as your training and nutrition and recuperation are on point, and of course depending on your own individual genetics. And there are plenty of guys out there, only using TRT doses, who look great, and many others, using TRT doses or higher, who don't look so great.

So as with most things in life, the answer to the original poster's question "How good can you look on test only?" is: "It depends." It depends on the dose, and it depends on you getting all the other pieces of the puzzle in place.
Excellent post and very informative. Thanks.
 
Shrinking depends on your starting point. IF a 280 lb. bodybuilder on 2-grams of gear comes off and just does real TRT (100 mg, etc) Im pretty sure he will shrink down.
If you are natty most of your life and jump on real TRT like 100 mg, no you wont shrink, may even grow a little.

It took me 30 years to gain 30 lbs (175 to 205) while being natty, jumping on TRT at age 50 (4.5 years ago). In the last year I probably gained 5 lbs of mostly lean-mass just from working at home 100%, able to focus better on diet, much more resting and better sleep (I had insomnia for ages, went away as a long-time stress job also went away) so sleep is 100% on point. (Plus my ability to burn off all fat has slowed at this age) but I still stay leanish. (Better sleep, crazy metabolism slowed with age, and TRT) helped me gain a little. So there different ways to look at if someone will shrink or grow just doing TRT.
 
Where did this shrink on TRT discussion come from? The question was can I look good on test only. Yes you can look good on test only, yes you can look good 100% natural, and yes you can look good juiced to the gills and jacked.

If anyone here believes you won't lose SOME muscle mass by lowering your dosages then you have been living under a rock all your life and know fuck all nothing. At the same time if you think that a person that has trained for 30 years and juiced at least 20 is going to shrink down to pee wee Herman on TRT while he is still TRAINING and EATING then your just a fucking idiot and you need to get the fuck off professional muscle, but you meatheads will argue with me all day but if Dante come here and tells you the same thing you will tuck your dicks between your legs and say YEAH DANTE you tell them bro! HA HA HA where are you when I need you @DOGGCRAPP
 
Where did this shrink on TRT discussion come from? The question was can I look good on test only. Yes you can look good on test only, yes you can look good 100% natural, and yes you can look good juiced to the gills and jacked.

If anyone here believes you won't lose SOME muscle mass by lowering your dosages then you have been living under a rock all your life and know fuck all nothing. At the same time if you think that a person that has trained for 30 years and juiced at least 20 is going to shrink down to pee wee Herman on TRT while he is still TRAINING and EATING then your just a fucking idiot and you need to get the fuck off professional muscle, but you meatheads will argue with me all day but if Dante come here and tells you the same thing you will tuck your dicks between your legs and say YEAH DANTE you tell them bro! HA HA HA where are you when I need you @DOGGCRAPP

:rolleyes:
 

Staff online

  • rAJJIN
    Moderator / FOUNDING Member

Forum statistics

Total page views
558,027,718
Threads
135,751
Messages
2,768,522
Members
160,339
Latest member
Dann828
NapsGear
HGH Power Store email banner
your-raws
Prowrist straps store banner
infinity
FLASHING-BOTTOM-BANNER-210x131
raws
Savage Labs Store email
Syntherol Site Enhancing Oil Synthol
aqpharma
yourmuscleshop210x131
hulabs
ezgif-com-resize-2-1
MA Research Chem store banner
MA Supps Store Banner
volartek
Keytech banner
musclechem
Godbullraw-bottom-banner
Injection Instructions for beginners
Knight Labs store email banner
3
ashp131
YMS-210x131-V02
Back
Top