• 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
worldofroids
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
Anabolic Hormones Store Banner
Ganabol Store Banner
Spend $100 and get bonus needles free at sterile syringes
Professional Muscle Store open now
mckee
PHARMAHGH1
Bruce Labs Store banner
gd
Professional Muscle Store open now
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
roids-210x65-48kb-1
granabolic123
napsgear-210x65
advertise1
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
advertise1
PM-Ace-Labs
advertise1
kinglab
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

Primo: science/broscience thread... assessment of strengths/weaknesses

Type-IIx

Active member
Registered
Newbies
Joined
Apr 9, 2021
Messages
207
The scientific literature on Primo suggests it is a relatively weak anabolic, that doesn't increase strength considerably, and not much else... but the bulk of it is not in English, and it's never been approved in predominately-English speaking countries for medical use... so it's somewhat of an incomplete picture for us. The bro-science, of which there is GOOD and bad, is in all different directions, and one expert disagrees with the next on the anecdotes from what I can see.

To dispense with forthright: MPMD linked to a (pilot) study where 1,200mg Primo was given to female cancer patients and without deep analysis used the dosage to make the unqualified determination that the dosage must be well-tolerated, particularly in men. Given that tolerability was not an end-point measured in that pilot study, it cannot be extrapolated that cancer patients in the early 1960s would not drop out as subjects if the end-result was potentially life-saving cancer treatment. So that particular study is unusable for the purpose of assessing tolerability. There's more wrong with it, but that's the major consideration for that particular paper.

What would be needed in order to assess Primo's efficacy objectively is real results from blood work (self report or original copy) showing:
- E2
- Primo dosage along with all other compounds/dosages that could potentially be active in the body
- LDL, HDL


Anyone who wants to contribute these data, PLEASE do, as there's no central location for such things anywhere.

DISCUSSION:
Now, on to what the consensus on the literature has been----
Peter Bond wrote a classical report on the metabolism of Primo in skeletal muscle and the mechanism behind its reduced anabolism, as well as the weaknesses of the Hershberger Assay: https://peterbond(dot)org/post/methenolone-primobolan-3a-reduction

Building upon that foundation, here is a graph from a 1965 study [1] which analyzed various AAS under strictly controlled conditions-- specifically Primo, Deca, Dbol, Anadur (nandrolone hexylphenylpropionate, a 21-day half life form of nandrolone), and Androxan (oral similar to androstanozole). It is a very strong study design that studied the human effects of the compared AAS under precisely manipulable conditions (»). That is, patients were tube-fed, immobilized, and the researchers could tease out the anabolic effects of the AAS studied with dietary manipulation (protein and caloric intake were manipulated) precision:

Primo-vs-Deca-Nitrogen-retention-1.png

In one patient (Case 1) a 100mg bolus of Primo was administered resulting in an uncomplicated 16 day positive nitrogen balance with a total nitrogen retention of 30.8g [1] on a caloric surplus (55%>BMR) and protein intake of 1.65 g/kg b.w. See Figure 1(N) [above].

This basically matched the nitrogen retention of a woman on an equivalent caloric and protein diet (45%>BMR), 1.5 g/kg b.w (30.6 g, 18 day positive nitrogen balance) [1].

The following Table shows that Primo at 100mg increased lean tissue by about 1/2 the amount as 50mg (!) of Deca:

Primo-vs-Deca-and-orals-lean-mass-Table.png

Some studies suggest (now this is very dependent upon factors besides the compound) that Primo may not be the best AAS for muscular strength or speed, if important to the user.

Czela et al. studied Primo's effects on cardiac remodeling [2]. In this study, the findings demonstrated that Primo profoundly accelerates the transition from fast (Type II) to slow (Type I) isoform myofiber types in the case of stimulation for cardiomyoplasty. This may be partly compound-specific, but is certainly also muscle-, species-, and stimulation- specific (latissmus dorsi - a fast twitch-predominant muscle typically, sheep). It is, however, certainly evidence against Primo being an appropriate choice for strength in general; however, not a definitive finding.

»: Dr. Bond did point out that by the timing of feeding and treatment initiation, when a patient is not at a baseline of and preceded by the fasted state, it is not a precise 1:1 comparison versus a patient that has been fed. This is, however, quite a strong study on its face for these purposes.

CONCLUSION:

Strengths/Weaknesses of Primo (This informal assessment is absolutely subject to change based on opinions and contributions so long as supported by evidence)
++
anecdotes of only mild negative impacts on LDL, HDL or even perfect blood work
+ anecdotes of particular aesthetic/mental benefits (roundness, dry, psychological QoL metrics) the former being impossible to measure, no, before/after pics are not evidence!
+/- anecdotes of serum E2 reduction and resultant sides (e.g., libido)

versus:

? anecdotes of hair loss/prostate sides WHICH the science (as it is a 5α reduced AAS) says CANNOT be as bad as testosterone in this regard
-- evidence (published) of comparatively low anabolic effects in human skeletal muscle (arguably only 25% as anabolic in skeletal muscle as deca!)
- evidence (published) of preferential slow rather than fast-muscle fiber transformation
-- high, viscous oil volume
-- financial cost/expense

I REALLY want to give Primo a real fair shake, but I feel like only bloodwork can lend much support to the anecdotes. This is just my initial/current impression.
____________
References:
[1] Saarne, A., Bjerstaf, L., & Ekman, B. (1965). Studies on the Nitrogen Balance in the Human during Long-term Treatment with Different Anabolic Agents under Strictly Standardized Conditions. Acta Medica Scandinavica, 177(2), 199–211. doi:10.1111/j.0954-6820.1965.tb01822.x
[2] Czesla, M., Mehlhorn, G., Fritzsche, D., & Asmussen, G. (1997). Cardiomyoplasty — Improvement of Muscle Fibre Type Transformation by an Anabolic Steroid (Metenolone). Journal of Molecular and Cellular Cardiology, 29(11), 2989–2996. doi:10.1006/jmcc.1997.0543
 

xpoc

Well-known member
Registered
Joined
Nov 19, 2016
Messages
591
OK dummy this down for us meatheads. What are the PROS of Primo. What are the CONS. I see the conclusion but I only see pluses, dashes, slashes and minus signs.

Can you please translate:

Based on this study the likely benefits of Primo are: _____________
Based on this study the likely negative issues related to Primo are: _____________
Based on this study Primo is inconclusive when it comes to: _______________

Not trying to be a smartass. I'm just asking for a highbrow translation down to knuckledragger terms.
 

Sj9

New member
Newbies
Joined
Aug 5, 2021
Messages
12
I have some bloodwork which I took towards the end of my most recent ‘bulking’ cycle and everything looked good for the most part. I can’t give an accurate judgement in terms of primo’s effects on lipids as I now use a statin year round and had also started using Anavar a week or two prior to getting the bloodwork so my HDL was lower than it would have been on test and primo alone but LDL was very low given the cycle, by the US metric I believe my LDL was in the low 70s and this was on 850 test (Bayer), 700 primo (Bayer) and 50mg var (UGL). Im in the UK but from what I remember the E2 would have been 18 by the US metric at the time which is far lower than what I would have liked to see but somehow I didn’t experience any of the low estradiol symptoms I’ve experienced in the past on similar numbers of estradiol, which for me are anxiety and joint soreness but at the same time I developed mild gynecomastia after several days of nipple soreness a few weeks prior to my bloodwork so based off of that I’m assuming primo does something similar to
Boldenone where it influences estrone? I can’t say for sure though as I didn’t get this estrogen tested and the only literature on the topic of primobolan and estrone I could find was an abstract in German and google translate didn’t help much with understanding what it meant.

My albumin was also very slightly elevated but this is something I’ve noticed across the board from guys who use higher dosages of primo for whatever reason.

I also don’t subscribe to the belief that AAS have any meaningful effect on different collagen types in humans but I have to say my skin looked flawless for the total amount of androgens I was using with zero acne and increased sebum production and my basic skincare routine had remained the same from prior to the cycle (cleanser, serum, tretinoin & moisturiser).

BP I can’t comment on since I used telmisartan (later losartan as Telmisartan always makes me anhedonic for whatever reason) with nebivolol as a preventative measure against unwanted cardiac remodelling.

Mentally I also felt great, there was no increased anxiety, my mood was better than prior to the cycle and I didn’t have any issues with irriatibility or anger that I‘be had with tren or even anavar which I suspect are because of their anti-glucocorticoid effects. I did notice some increased lethargy later on in the cycle that I’ve seen a few people mention that they’ve had with primo but honestly this could have been because of the amount of weekly sets I was doing at that point or from the high amount of food I was consuming.

I ended the cycle a bit earlier as I noticed some slightly increased recession at the temples of my hair but I can’t say this wouldn’t have happened without the primo being in there given that I was on 850mg of testosterone, but that was enough for me to realise that this isn’t a compound I’ll likely run in the future in high dosages since I love my hair too much and purely in terms of muscle hypertrophy it doesn’t do anything that other compounds can’t do better and I don’t think the sheer cost warrants the results that it provides.

I don’t subscribe to a lot of Peter Bonds beliefs but I think the 3a-HSD does render primobolan weaker than its testosterone and 19-nor derived counterparts in humans from a muscle hypertrophy standpoint, and I know Jordan Peters who is a huge fan of primobolan for himself and his clients has said similar things in the past. Primo also did next to nothing for my strength but given that I was training strictly for hypertrophy at that time it isn’t really an issue for me. I also spent a fortune on a few hundred Bayer Amps along with paying for to janoshik to test them so it hurts me to know that I likely won’t run more than an amp a week or so in the future as I don’t compete in bodybuilding and I like my hair too much, so my next cycle will probably be 100mg or so a week at most for some mild estrogen management from the test paired with lower dosages of nandrolone.
 

Type-IIx

Active member
Registered
Newbies
Joined
Apr 9, 2021
Messages
207
OK dummy this down for us meatheads. What are the PROS of Primo. What are the CONS. I see the conclusion but I only see pluses, dashes, slashes and minus signs.

Can you please translate:

Based on this study the likely benefits of Primo are: _____________
Based on this study the likely negative issues related to Primo are: _____________
Based on this study Primo is inconclusive when it comes to: _______________

Not trying to be a smartass. I'm just asking for a highbrow translation down to knuckledragger terms.
Hey bro, not a smart ass at all. So, if you look at the + signs as a check mark or positive and the - signs as a negative or X mark, but also consider that anecdotes are just kind of weaker/more contradictory so have to be "weighted" lighter than the more authoritative research that I cited that is "weighted" a bit heavier.

Based on the studies in English, the likely benefits of Primo are its efficacy in breast cancer basically (because that's all they've really looked at, it's only available in a few markets for breast cancer).

Based on the studies I posted, the likely negative issues related to Primo are that it's relatively weak as a muscle/strength builder on a per mg basis.

Based on the all the evidence, from anecdotes and the research, though, it's completely inconclusive how tolerable Primo is: whether it makes hair fall out or causes prostate issues, how it affects lipids, E2, how it affects mental FEELZ (well-being).

What's crazy is the research on Tren (in cattle and rats) is great compared to Primo for our purposes.
 

Type-IIx

Active member
Registered
Newbies
Joined
Apr 9, 2021
Messages
207
I have some bloodwork which I took towards the end of my most recent ‘bulking’ cycle and everything looked good for the most part. I can’t give an accurate judgement in terms of primo’s effects on lipids as I now use a statin year round and had also started using Anavar a week or two prior to getting the bloodwork so my HDL was lower than it would have been on test and primo alone but LDL was very low given the cycle, by the US metric I believe my LDL was in the low 70s and this was on 850 test (Bayer), 700 primo (Bayer) and 50mg var (UGL). Im in the UK but from what I remember the E2 would have been 18 by the US metric at the time which is far lower than what I would have liked to see but somehow I didn’t experience any of the low estradiol symptoms I’ve experienced in the past on similar numbers of estradiol, which for me are anxiety and joint soreness but at the same time I developed mild gynecomastia after several days of nipple soreness a few weeks prior to my bloodwork so based off of that I’m assuming primo does something similar to
Boldenone where it influences estrone? I can’t say for sure though as I didn’t get this estrogen tested and the only literature on the topic of primobolan and estrone I could find was an abstract in German and google translate didn’t help much with understanding what it meant.

My albumin was also very slightly elevated but this is something I’ve noticed across the board from guys who use higher dosages of primo for whatever reason.

I also don’t subscribe to the belief that AAS have any meaningful effect on different collagen types in humans but I have to say my skin looked flawless for the total amount of androgens I was using with zero acne and increased sebum production and my basic skincare routine had remained the same from prior to the cycle (cleanser, serum, tretinoin & moisturiser).

BP I can’t comment on since I used telmisartan (later losartan as Telmisartan always makes me anhedonic for whatever reason) with nebivolol as a preventative measure against unwanted cardiac remodelling.

Mentally I also felt great, there was no increased anxiety, my mood was better than prior to the cycle and I didn’t have any issues with irriatibility or anger that I‘be had with tren or even anavar which I suspect are because of their anti-glucocorticoid effects. I did notice some increased lethargy later on in the cycle that I’ve seen a few people mention that they’ve had with primo but honestly this could have been because of the amount of weekly sets I was doing at that point or from the high amount of food I was consuming.

I ended the cycle a bit earlier as I noticed some slightly increased recession at the temples of my hair but I can’t say this wouldn’t have happened without the primo being in there given that I was on 850mg of testosterone, but that was enough for me to realise that this isn’t a compound I’ll likely run in the future in high dosages since I love my hair too much and purely in terms of muscle hypertrophy it doesn’t do anything that other compounds can’t do better and I don’t think the sheer cost warrants the results that it provides.

I don’t subscribe to a lot of Peter Bonds beliefs but I think the 3a-HSD does render primobolan weaker than its testosterone and 19-nor derived counterparts in humans from a muscle hypertrophy standpoint, and I know Jordan Peters who is a huge fan of primobolan for himself and his clients has said similar things in the past. Primo also did next to nothing for my strength but given that I was training strictly for hypertrophy at that time it isn’t really an issue for me. I also spent a fortune on a few hundred Bayer Amps along with paying for to janoshik to test them so it hurts me to know that I likely won’t run more than an amp a week or so in the future as I don’t compete in bodybuilding and I like my hair too much, so my next cycle will probably be 100mg or so a week at most for some mild estrogen management from the test paired with lower dosages of nandrolone.
Great contribution, if we continue to get posts like this, which I am not sure of, I'll link to your post as
- good evidence of lowering/controlling E2 (perhaps through the same mechanism as boldenone)
- good evidence of albumin elevation
- some evidence (but really hard to say with all the different compounds) on QoL/mental wellbeing
- some evidence of skin improvement/maintenance

I think the var especially (but also the test at 850) confounds the lipids measurements (as well as your statin use), and with the hair loss I actually really think it's attributable more to the test (5alpha-reduction, 850mg). But we'll take this as evidence of primo+test's association with hair loss.

What's interesting especially:
- Albumin elevation
- "That skin looked flawless for the total amount of androgens I was using with zero acne and increased sebum production and my basic skincare routine had remained the same from prior to the cycle (cleanser, serum, tretinoin & moisturiser)"

So albumin is another thing guys can pay attention to and report on with primo (its elevation is a good thing and kind of makes sense with higher dosages as it would effectively "loosely bind" the AAS and slow down but not totally bind up its absorption into the circulation... An "adaptive" change, versus SHBG elevation (which AAS also lowers, good for the cycle's effectiveness).

It's actually possible primo is a procollagenous drug (though your report doesn't really touch upon this aspect a ton) like winstrol and nandrolone in particular (I have good evidence on this feature of these compounds if you're interested). I may add this as another facet of Primo's "profile" if guys mention it again.

I think if guys continue contributing to Matsuo's thread on E2 and Primo or mention it here in a more complete "profile" of Primo, I will add a hyperlink to your post as evidence on the above points
 

Staff online

  • LATS
    Moderator / FOUNDING Member / NPC Judge

Forum statistics

Total page views
513,094,699
Threads
126,082
Messages
2,470,484
Members
156,517
Latest member
Scorpyd
Top