Nandrolone Data (including joint pain relief mechanisms [by Type-IIx])

[Brock456]

Thank you for explaining. Yes I've tried about 500 mg test and 400 deca and my libido was gone . I've also done 225 mg test and 600 mg Deca and my libido died we're talking floppy noodle limp zero libido.

Try adding in Mast or Prov

It worked for me

 

[LATS]

Try adding in Mast or Prov

It worked for me

Add a bit of mast.. not much.. doesn't take alot

 

[Bio]

Add a bit of mast.. not much.. doesn't take alot

LATS how much are we talking?

 

[Brock456]

Add a bit of mast.. not much.. doesn't take alot

I stopped taking Deca bc of Deca dick a long time ago after a bad cycle.

I mentioned it on here a year or so and (I won’t tag him bc I always do when I mention this) but he mentioned in adding mast and it made a huge difference for me and now I love Deca again.

 

[Brock456]

LATS how much are we talking?

For me 200mg with 800mg Deca is good. The more, the better my sex drive. I like keeping low though. Also helps keep some of the water off too.

 

[LATS]

LATS how much are we talking?

Depends on the cycle.. but I'd deca dosage is lower 400mgs or below then a simple dose of mast at 100mgs a week does wonders for displacement. And higher and 200 mgs is great.

 

[LATS]

I stopped taking Deca bc of Deca dick a long time ago after a bad cycle.

I mentioned it on here a year or so and (I won’t tag him bc I always do when I mention this) but he mentioned in adding mast and it made a huge difference for me and now I love Deca again.

Yes mast has great ability in displacement. If one suffers sides with deca mast truly is a game changer for many. It doesn't take much either

 

[climber]

Thanks for this! Nandrolone is my all time fav so great having more info and also hearing the "10x more heart damaging" study is flawed was a bonus

 

[LATS]

Thanks for this! Nandrolone is my all time fav so great having more info and also hearing the "10x more heart damaging" study is flawed was a bonus

Yeah.. deca is diffinitely not benign.. but not what that study implied..

 

[Type-IIx]

@Type-IIx Enjoying your informative threads! Do you happen to have any threads or information regarding the muscle building properties of deca,tren test - any of these where you can compare?

I wrote a post here: https://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/index.php?threads/primo-vs-tren-mast.170767/post-3075085 that is basically a brain dump of features unique to Tren, EQ, Deca, Drol.

When it comes to analyses of strictly skeletal muscle hypertrophy in man, I believe that Deca > Tren > Test (at equimolar doses). But, Tren potently increases skeletal muscle while concomitantly reducing fat mass (very potent recomp agent). Test potentiates the action of Deca & Tren (so its use in combination with either or BOTH of the other two makes is synergistic, i.e., 1 + 1 > 2).

There is no data quantifying body composition changes in humans with tren. There is short-term (8 weeks if memory serves), low dose (200 mg if memory serves) data of nandrolone with a small number of subjects that fails to detect a significant between-group difference in skeletal muscle hypertrophy between test vs. nandrolone. But extend out duration and increase dose, use sensitive measures like muscle ultrasound, increase the number of subjects, I am sure you'd see greater actual skeletal muscle gains in 800 mg nandrolone vs. 800 mg testosterone x 24 weeks. But the data is not actually there to support that, it's supposition influenced by experience (semi-bro-science) and a mere hypothesis, not yet proven nor disproven.

The human data certainly shows that Primo << Nandrolone (by a factor of ~4, on an equimolar basis) in skeletal muscle hypertrophy in humans. See: https://www.professionalmuscle.com/...ad-assessment-of-strengths-weaknesses.169109/

 

[Type-IIx]

Any concern for LVF in those that supplement TRT with 50-100mg of Deca indefinitely?

LVH risk would be minimal at 100 mg and essentially nonexistent at 50 mg weekly. Note, that there is a lack of understanding (at least on my part) of the role of age, genetics, nutrition, and other factors and the effects on the RA(A)S, endothelial cells, etc. But certainly influences. We know smoking has highly deletrious effects on endothelial cells, that sort of thing. But there could be high degrees of variation in LVH risk due to 100 mg Deca weekly. But I'd feel safe doing it (I might scale it back to 50 mg if I were 50 yrs plus).

 

[MooseKnuckles]

I have been using a low dose Nandrolone (100mg EW) and GH (2iu ED) since rotator cuff surgery, I've read a few studies and figured it couldn't hurt using both of them together.

"With proper dosages of nandrolone in the postoperative period, the tendon to bone healing may be substantially improved allowing for the patient to make a quicker recovery"

 

[whacked]

LVH risk would be minimal at 100 mg and essentially nonexistent at 50 mg weekly. Note, that there is a lack of understanding (at least on my part) of the role of age, genetics, nutrition, and other factors and the effects on the RA(A)S, endothelial cells, etc. But certainly influences. We know smoking has highly deletrious effects on endothelial cells, that sort of thing. But there could be high degrees of variation in LVH risk due to 100 mg Deca weekly. But I'd feel safe doing it (I might scale it back to 50 mg if I were 50 yrs plus).

Thanks TypeII

 

[xpoc]

I wrote a post here: https://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/index.php?threads/primo-vs-tren-mast.170767/post-3075085 that is basically a brain dump of features unique to Tren, EQ, Deca, Drol.

When it comes to analyses of strictly skeletal muscle hypertrophy in man, I believe that Deca > Tren > Test (at equimolar doses). But, Tren potently increases skeletal muscle while concomitantly reducing fat mass (very potent recomp agent). Test potentiates the action of Deca & Tren (so its use in combination with either or BOTH of the other two makes is synergistic, i.e., 1 + 1 > 2).

There is no data quantifying body composition changes in humans with tren. There is short-term (8 weeks if memory serves), low dose (200 mg if memory serves) data of nandrolone with a small number of subjects that fails to detect a significant between-group difference in skeletal muscle hypertrophy between test vs. nandrolone. But extend out duration and increase dose, use sensitive measures like muscle ultrasound, increase the number of subjects, I am sure you'd see greater actual skeletal muscle gains in 800 mg nandrolone vs. 800 mg testosterone x 24 weeks. But the data is not actually there to support that, it's supposition influenced by experience (semi-bro-science) and a mere hypothesis, not yet proven nor disproven.

The human data certainly shows that Primo << Nandrolone (by a factor of ~4, on an equimolar basis) in skeletal muscle hypertrophy in humans. See: https://www.professionalmuscle.com/...ad-assessment-of-strengths-weaknesses.169109/

In quick laymen (meathead terms) based on a hypothetical situation for a TRT guy who wanted a little pre-summer bump for 10 weeks:

A. 400 mg of test per week

or

B. 200 mg of test per week plus 200 mg of deca


Based on your research which option would produce greater muscle mass gains and which option would be "safer."


PS thanks for all your contributions on this msg board. And although I have formal education, I really need to focus on your written word to understand some of what you post, so...yeah if you could provide a meathead Cliff's note synopsis at the end of your posts it would be helpful.

 

[Type-IIx]

In quick laymen (meathead terms) based on a hypothetical situation for a TRT guy who wanted a little pre-summer bump for 10 weeks:

A. 400 mg of test per week

or

B. 200 mg of test per week plus 200 mg of deca


Based on your research which option would produce greater muscle mass gains and which option would be "safer."


PS thanks for all your contributions on this msg board. And although I have formal education, I really need to focus on your written word to understand some of what you post, so...yeah if you could provide a meathead Cliff's note synopsis at the end of your posts it would be helpful.

Without boring you with reasoning and minutae, strictly as stated (dose x time), 400 mg of test per week x 10 week is the superior cycle for both muscle mass & safety.

 

[xpoc]

Without boring you with reasoning and minutae, strictly as stated (dose x time), 400 mg of test per week x 10 week is the superior cycle for both muscle mass & safety.

PERFECT. You have enough cred on here that when stating your opinion, you don't need to produce supporting docs on every single response. Thanks.

 

[MasteroniPepperoni]

@Type-IIx could be a dumb question, but are the nandrolone related sides due to progesterone activity or does it actually convert to prolactin? Some guys will get bloods and shows normal levels of prolactin. I guess the claim is nandrolone + an environment with high estrogen levels will cause the sides. Prolactin up regulates estrogen? Vice versa? God bless .

 

[Type-IIx]

@Type-IIx could be a dumb question, but are the nandrolone related sides due to progesterone activity or does it actually convert to prolactin? Some guys will get bloods and shows normal levels of prolactin. I guess the claim is nandrolone + an environment with high estrogen levels will cause the sides. Prolactin up regulates estrogen? Vice versa? God bless .

It's not a dumb question at all brother. I've actually addressed it in a quasi-article that I've written and sent to OuchThatHurts (he's going to give a condensed and simplified rehashing). Look out for it soon, it'll be titled something like "Distinguishing Prolactin vs. Progestins."

Basically, wrt nandrolone, prolactin is a secondary concern (its expression can be up-regulated by estrogens, but not by nandrolone per se). Progestagenic action of nandrolone (PR binding) is indeed influenced by high estradiol concentrations, causing secondary hypogonadism, gynecomastia. So an AI is indicated, rather than any prolactin-lowering agent, with these symptoms.

 

[LATS]

It's not a dumb question at all brother. I've actually addressed it in a quasi-article that I've written and sent to OuchThatHurts (he's going to give a condensed and simplified rehashing). Look out for it soon, it'll be titled something like "Distinguishing Prolactin vs. Progestins."

Basically, wrt nandrolone, prolactin is a secondary concern (its expression can be up-regulated by estrogens, but not by nandrolone per se). Progestagenic action of nandrolone (PR binding) is indeed influenced by high estradiol concentrations, causing secondary hypogonadism, gynecomastia. So an AI is indicated, rather than any prolactin-lowering agent, with these symptoms.

Yes.. much of the " deca dick" issues are brought on by high estro levels. The common bro science was to up test to counter deca dick. He works briefly. Then you are hit again.

 

[Biggerp73]

Type 2 - what's your background? Are you just reading studies on the internet, or do you have some personal experience testing these compounds, professional education, etc?