Test is not test (from another board about esters)

[Whey2Heavy]

Something that muddies the water on this subject here is the legitimacy of UGL products... People on other forums have tested what was supposed to be propionate or TNE and it was really just enanthate at a lower dose.

Overall though that was a very interesting read, I agree from what I have read on the subject that it makes sense.

 

[nfernoo]

My apologies if I am wrong, but didn't Brad say that deca was superior to npp for mass gain, in a thread on npp/deca?

One more thing.. The topic of people using more aas these days comes up constantly. I don't remember all this short ester stuff in the 90s, other than tren from pelets. Not saying that they weren't around, but it seems like they were much less.

The word mass gets tossed around. And usually means gains
In general. Lbm and water weight.
I'm more interested in lbm, not just mass.

 

[emeric delczeg]

only thoughts are what a waste of time reading that!!!!

lol


without having the studies there to read all we are left with is the authors interpretation of them which is meaning less at best.

the thought process seems flawed though, of course based on one injection you would expect to see the results of the studies, but in bb we are not doing 1 injection!

simple truths about test:

tne is strongest mg for mg and it also generates more nerve excitation then esterfied test.

some people react better to some esters then others.
example some people don't tolerate prop well, others maybe cyp is not so good, just an individual thing.

you have to play with different esters and see what works well for you.

switch them up every so often. doesn't need to be every 2-3 weeks, that's kind of silly, this is a long term thing. I do notice after using the same test for 1-3 years that switching to a new test makes me "feel"it a lil more. that goes away in time.

the rest is just figuring out how to inject on a regular basis to achieve stable blood levels and minimize side effects.

the rest is just over complicating a pretty simple thing, the people doing it would prob be better served to lift, eat, rest repeat and not stress over the mental masturbation.

You don`t need to switch, you need only low doses, low dose will kip your body sensitive to androgen's, high dozes you will and you will have to increase the dozes which will cause many side effects.

 

[Kaladryn]

I call bullshit on esters having any effect on transcription that takes place after the test binds with the AR, it's just not scientific.

-You are misinterpreting that dumb study on nitrogen retention, it was ONE injection of 200mg prop vs enanthate. Patrick Arnold has posted about that study btw.

-Everything you said about estrogen is bullshit, that is all solved by frequent dosing, with steady plasma levels aromatization is the same.

-GH and IGF-1, again total bullshit, all due to above mentioned aromatization issue and studies using inadequate dosing frequencies.

Some of the information you posted here was obviously copy and pasted from another article on another site, you can tell by several of the misspelling consistencies.

 

[Kaladryn]

I didn't read the article word for word, but from what I saw, he appears to be correct. I wrote a similar article several years ago. In fact, this one looks remarkably similar to mine in terms of content, although less well-written, if I do say so myself

Esters directly affect the rate of estrogen conversion, protein synthesis, and peak plasma levels.

The latter is common sense, and different release rates will result in different peak levels of the drug in the bloodstream.

However, fewer people are aware of an ester's abilities to influence estrogen conversion and protein synthesis. Literally every single study since the 1930's onward (there have been dozens of them) have shown that longer esters increase protein synthesis to greater degree than short esters, per mg.

Longer esters also increase the rate of estrogen conversion, which is why they tend to result in more water retention. In theory, this increased rate of estrogen conversion could also result in a greater degree of HPTA suppression, as estrogen itself is suppressive of testosterone production.

However, whether or not short esters increase peak plasma levels (blood levels) to a greater degree than longer esters will depend on both the frequency and number of injections administered. In only one injection is administered, shorter esters will result in higher blood levels due to their more rapid release rate, but this faster release rate is an disadvantage when comparing blood levels after multiple injections have been administered.

When longer esters are injected at an equivalent dosage over several weeks, their delayed release rate will allow blood levels of the drug to accumulate--or "build" on each other--culminating in a higher peak blood level. In contrast, short esters will clear the system within a few days to a week, so blood levels will never rise higher than they do within the first week. Very little "building" takes place. With a long ester like test undecanoate taking up to 6 weeks to fully release into the bloodstream, as many as 6 weeks of injections can build in the system at once, resulting in super high blood levels by the 6 week mark.

What I find odd is the large number of people still claiming that esters have no effect on the activity of a steroid. Now, if all these esters provided visually identical effects, I could understand why someone might think this, but how can someone deny that esters have no effect on the body when we have visual "proof" right in front of our eyes? Obviously, if we get a different effect when attaching a different ester to the same drug, common sense tells us that the ester has something to do with it. As noted above, clinical evidence is also available, in which the different testosterone esters have been demonstrated to increase protein synthesis to different degrees.

WTF Mike, long esters building on each other? Really? That old dogma? High plasma levels of ESTERIFIED testosterone build up, not CLEAVED testosterone. Higher levels of esterified testosterone built up is MEANINGLESS.

I have had to debunk that "long esters build up" bullshit too many times, sorry it's annoying.

And as for nitrogen retention, are you suggesting that there is an INCREASE IN TRANSCRIPTION that takes place when a free testosterone binds to the AR because of the ester that is NO LONGER ATTACHED?!?!

It's all dosing frequency in these two-bit studies.

 

[sammy555]

I'm not going to argue the technicalities of the op. That said from past experience any real world difference is negligible enough I've never been able to notice it. For me test is test but others may react differently

 

[raw33man]

I got more estro sides from 300 of Test P than 500mg of Test E

 

[nfernoo]

I call bullshit on esters having any effect on transcription that takes place after the test binds with the AR, it's just not scientific.

-You are misinterpreting that dumb study on nitrogen retention, it was ONE injection of 200mg prop vs enanthate. Patrick Arnold has posted about that study btw.

-Everything you said about estrogen is bullshit, that is all solved by frequent dosing, with steady plasma levels aromatization is the same.

-GH and IGF-1, again total bullshit, all due to above mentioned aromatization issue and studies using inadequate dosing frequencies.

Some of the information you posted here was obviously copy and pasted from another article on another site, you can tell by several of the misspelling consistencies.

Um. The subject thread says from another board.
So yeah its copy and paste Mr.

And, great info. I kinda like sticking with test prop every day.
I didn't want to switch to test e

 

[LK3]

What do you mean by this? More energy/stimulating effect?

we are not talking about energy, we are talking about like nerve strength and the ability to fire ( even though that is a bad way to put it... )

in a dumbed down way its like this, tne will make you stronger then any other test at the equivalent dose even when we adjust for ester weight.

so you will be stronger taking say 1000mg of tne then you would taking 1400 or so mg of te because of the way tne works.

I get way more noticeable estrogen issues with tne then tp or te.

 

[LK3]

You don`t need to switch, you need only low doses, low dose will kip your body sensitive to androgen's, high dozes you will and you will have to increase the dozes which will cause many side effects.

while I do not disagree with this in any way I will say I noticed the feel of test much more after switching esters, rant the same te for 3+ years then got some new test.

dose 100-300mgs which is much higher then the protocol you go by, but not really what I would call high dosing.

plus the feel things goes away, its just like a short term change largely subjective I think.

 

[knuggy]

nice read

 

[grizzly978]

I have to agree with the OP. I've used every kind of test ester at high doses and find high doses of longer esters add more size. Prop doesn't add much weight to me(may be different for others) but my opinion is Cyp or Enth will make you bigger and stronger than prop. TNE is an awesome short ester but I'd take 1g of Cyp over 1g of TNE after using both at those doses......Good post

 

[Mike Arnold]

I call bullshit on esters having any effect on transcription that takes place after the test binds with the AR, it's just not scientific.

-You are misinterpreting that dumb study on nitrogen retention, it was ONE injection of 200mg prop vs enanthate. Patrick Arnold has posted about that study btw.
There have been "many" studies done since the 30's--all showing higher rates of protein synthesis with longer esters.

Yes, it is due to inadequate dosing frequencies, but many people don't dose their AAS frequently enough to completely overcome that. Still, it doesn't take away from the fact that an injection of test cyp results in greater rates if protein synthesis compared to an equivalent dose of test prop.


-Everything you said about estrogen is bullshit, that is all solved by frequent Correct, but again, it doesn't take away from the fact that with the dosing schedules most use, estrogen is more problematic with longer esters. This is why estrogen related side effects are WAY more common with longer esters compared to shorter esters.

We can sit here all day long and say "adequate dosing frequencies solve the problem", but not the fact remains that most people don't dose them frequently enough to nullify the issue.



-GH and IGF-1, again total bullshit, all due to above mentioned aromatization issue and studies using inadequate dosing frequencies.
Same thing--goes back to dosing frequencies.

Some of the information you posted here was obviously copy and pasted from another article on another site, you can tell by several of the misspelling consistencies.

You're right in what you're saying, Kaladryn, but from what we are seeing in the real world, the problem is not so easily fixed, and plenty of guys inject their AAS fairly frequently, at eats compared to what most guys were doing 15-20 years ago. Yet, there is still a much greater incidence of estrogen related side effects with longer esters. This is undeniable.

This is why tons of guys get gyno using just 400-500 mg of test cyp/wee (assuming no A.I is used), yet have no problem at all with 600-700 mg/week of test prop. I see it all the time--over and over again, as well as in my personal life. I am not sure what dosing frequency one would have to employ in order to fix the issue, but it must be pretty damn frequent, because even with an EOD injection schedule, long esters are still much more problematic than shorter esters.

I have tried dosing frequencies at the very low and high ends, and yet, I have always been more prone to estrogen related issues with longer esters...and like I said, I am far from alone. 400 mg of test cyp/week and I have tits in 6 weeks. 600 mg of prop/week and nothing...no matter how long I run it.

Sure, you have some guys who don't experience estrogenic side effects even when using 1.5 grams of test per week, regardless of ester of dosing frequencies, but these people are far from the norm. For all the other 1,000's of other guys out there who do have problems, it is impossible to deny that even with fairly frequent dosing schedule, many people still experience estrogenic side effects to a much greater degree than with shorter esters.

 

[Mike Arnold]

WTF Mike, long esters building on each other? Really? That old dogma? High plasma levels of ESTERIFIED testosterone build up, not CLEAVED testosterone. Higher levels of esterified testosterone built up is MEANINGLESS.

I have had to debunk that "long esters build up" bullshit too many times, sorry it's annoying.
Don't put words in my mouth. The fact is that long esters will result in higher test levels than short esters after several injection are administered. 7 days after an injection of test prop, T levels will have returned to normal. Not with test cyp, so yes, you are going to have a higher T level with longer esters than with short esters because they "build" on each other, cleaved or not. It's common sense that an test molecule that is still esterfied cannot be used by the body.


And as for nitrogen retention, are you suggesting that there is an INCREASE IN TRANSCRIPTION that takes place when a free testosterone binds to the AR because of the ester that is NO LONGER ATTACHED?!?!
Again, don't put words in my mouth-- I NEVER said any such thing, Once testosterone has been cleaved, it is exactly the same as any other testosterone, regardless which ester was previously attached. I was already well aware that dosing frequencies were the reason for the different rates of protein synthesis, estrogen conversion, etc. I have know this for over 10 years and have seen at least a half-dozen people write on it.

Still, the fact remains that ester length DOES influence estrogen conversion, protein synthesis, etc. The other reality is that MANY people have to deal with the real-world effects of these esters because as far as I can tell, not many people are dosing them frequently enough to eliminate the difference.

Every time I post, I don't have to write a damn book, elaborating on every single point I make. Everything I said was true. Most of my posts are geared toward practical application, so if longer esters are almost always more problematic in the real-world in terms of estrogenic side effects, I em not going to sit here and tell someone "Oh, don't worry about ester length. All you have to do is administer your testosterone at a rate of 20 mg every 3 hours and everything will equal out".

No, what I am going to say is "You are more likely to experience estrogenic side effects with longer esters, so take that into consideration when using them". Why? Because they are going to result in higher estrogen levels when using the dosing frequencies basically everyone uses!!! Impractical recommendations, at least in my opinion, are useless.

Now, if you want to come in here and further elaborate on the subject, be my guest, but you should stop short of making assumptions and putting words into people's mouths.



It's all dosing frequency in these two-bit studies.
There have been numerous conducted on this subject going back over 80 years. You act as if the researchers came to the wrong conclusions--they did not. The results were accurate. These days, we know why longer esters provided these results, but knowing why does not invalidate the results, nor does it change what people are experiencing in the real-world.

.....

 

[Mike Arnold]

I got more estro sides from 300 of Test P than 500mg of Test E

Then I would question if you got real Test P. Of course, I am assuming you got bloodwork to confirm?

 

[Mike Arnold]

we are not talking about energy, we are talking about like nerve strength and the ability to fire ( even though that is a bad way to put it... )

in a dumbed down way its like this, tne will make you stronger then any other test at the equivalent dose even when we adjust for ester weight.

so you will be stronger taking say 1000mg of tne then you would taking 1400 or so mg of te because of the way tne works.

I get way more noticeable estrogen issues with tne then tp or te.

See bold above: I believe that, as an injection of TNE is going to deliver a much larger dose of testosterone to the receptors than an equivalent dose of esterfied test.

Regardless, we already know TNE can provide immediate bursts in strength, even when in the presence of fairly high blood levels of esterfied test, which is why so many strength athletes use it immediately before powerlifting and strongman events.

 

[nfernoo]

Mike. Can u answer my question above of which protocol to use which
would be better for lbm?

 

[Mike Arnold]

Mike. Can u answer my question above of which protocol to use which
would be better for lbm?

I don't see a question--what is it?

 

[nfernoo]

Mike, so what if you're taking an anti e?
And what if you're doing test prop every day?

I'm debating on

1400 test prop per week (every day inject 200mg)
Or
1400 test p/test e mix ( the blend is 100mg test prop and 100mg test e per ml)

The more muscle things sounds great lol.

This mike

 

[Mike Arnold]

This mike

Every kind of test is going to be a proficient size builder. The primary difference will be in the amount of water retention, although an AI will clear that right up.

I suggest making your choice based on which test you "like" better--whichever one provides the effects you're seeking.