More effective to not come off for length of career instead of yo-yoing?

[jrs]

The traditional cycle ends with a PCT in which some gains are lost, the body strains to normalize itself, and a host of issues have to be dealt with (major changes in body composition, body weight, moods, testicular/pituitary function, estrogen levels, drastic changes in blood pressure, cholesterol levels, etc)

This goes against traditional thinking, as does any theoretical 'advancement', but would it maybe be more safe to only be shut down once and then recover with one good PCT after the end of your competitive years, instead of constantly going up and down and 'telling' your body what to do? After a while maybe the body says, "alright motherfucker, you keep everything in stasis then with no help from me"

Personally I wouldn't be bothered to have to theoretically be on HRT the rest of my life. However, I haven't had children yet, and that's one thing I plan on doing in the next couple of years.

BOTH ways work.. as is evident in the occasional medical literature on the subject. Men thought to be sterile from heavy, long-term use, end up recovering eventually. Almost always, it seems.


Thoughts?

 

[Dad]

This "host of issues" is what people deal with who are on long, HPT axis-suppressive cycles, and don't bother with trying to understand or implement PCT.

Most of this can be avoided (yes, there is some genetic vairiance among people, but not enough to invalidate this idea) by structuring cycles well (as in short with reasonable dosages) or avoiding drug use altogether, and paying even more attention to PCT and time off for normalization than one does to the cycle.

So is staying "on throughout one's competitve career" the answer? First, most on these boards, as in 98%+ don't and won't ever compete, so they're simply doing all this for nothing, which makes NO sense. Second, staying "on" continuously, assuming years for a competitive career, just about gaurantees HPT axis suppression of the worst kind, and a L-O-N-G period for recovery. So, no, this is NOT a good answer at all.

I'd like to see the "medical literature" yuo are referring to.

 

[Hazuya]

This "host of issues" is what people deal with who are on long, HPT axis-suppressive cycles, and don't bother with trying to understand or implement PCT.

Most of this can be avoided (yes, there is some genetic vairiance among people, but not enough to invalidate this idea) by structuring cycles well (as in short with reasonable dosages) or avoiding drug use altogether, and paying even more attention to PCT and time off for normalization than one does to the cycle.

So is staying "on throughout one's competitve career" the answer? First, most on these boards, as in 98%+ don't and won't ever compete, so they're simply doing all this for nothing, which makes NO sense. Second, staying "on" continuously, assuming years for a competitive career, just about gaurantees HPT axis suppression of the worst kind, and a L-O-N-G period for recovery. So, no, this is NOT a good answer at all.

I'd like to see the "medical literature" yuo are referring to.

I don't think that is a fair statement. No offence to you but you have no right to determine what or what not makes sense for me.

However I choose to rationlize my aas usage is just that. I see plenty of people doing things that I will never understand. Yet they are over the age of 21 and have every right to do what they do.

If you were saying that from a safety issue than it needs to be quantified. Assuming that was your unsaid point than I can ask questions and attempt this as safely as possible.

Quite frankly aas would NEVER be this commonly available or inexpensive if it were used only by persons in competition. Availability and good pricing are directly a result of people like me.

I'm off my soapbox now and I do consider your comments valued so please understand where I am coming from.