Test & Winny- Are They Synergistic???  

Page 2 / 2
  RSS

Seabiscuit Hogg
(@seabiscuit-hogg)
Estimable Member
Joined: 12 months ago
Posts: 139
23/06/2018 9:38 pm  
Posted by: Big Cat
Thanx, i'd be careful about posting those huck finn cut and paste's, I see a lot of stuff in there that is not only entirely incorrect, but that was disproven some time ago. Especially in the first post with that class I and class II bull Bill Roberts concocted in some drunken fashion one night. It was never accepted, and frankly its far too simplistic to explain anything.

The best example perhaps is testosterone itself. One of the best drugs as far as AR binding and transcription goes, and definitely the drug with the most known non-AR mediated mechanisms of growth as well. So which is it ? Class I or Class II ? Fact is, all known AAS bind the AR (class I) and all of them have at least some form on non-AR mediated effect (Class II).

Actually, I think he wrote it as advertising hype for a pro hormone product. My biggest problem with the article was that it implied test was interchangable with with other so called class I AAS's.

While there aren't any AAS's that fit neatly into one group, we all tend to build stacks by catagorizing drugs this way.

Seabiscuit Hogg is a fictious internet character. It is not recommended that you receive medical advice from fictious internet characters.

SBH :)


ReplyQuote
Big Cat
(@big-cat)
Member Moderator
Joined: 12 months ago
Posts: 299
24/06/2018 6:33 am  

The only true justification for stacking is if A+B is better than 2A or 2B.

In reality that's not always the case. Of course we can discard 90% of the fantasies we see on boards daily as the bullshit they are. but :

1.Many stacks are made with other concerns than efficacy in mind. Such as for example safety. Unfortunately our little world has a very poor history of defining safety, causing most people in this category to doctor out BS stacks to avoid aesthetic problems, instead of making stacks actually safer.

2.Another concern often is wellness and well-being. If you don't feel well using something, you often try to figure out if you can't get similar results without feeling as shitty. A good example here are the current rage of legal 1T products. I had made and tested a batch of m1t long before this craze in three athletes. The results from a 6 week 40 mg per day cycle were not insatisfactory, but the amount of lethargy they caused basically prevented them from training correctly (of course I'm not even mentioning high liver values and polykasuria).

Both points are of course resolved to some extent by always including testosterone in every stack. Although I can't imagine a good stack without test, hypothetically if there was one, then you could adjust it by adding test, for the aforementioned reasons. For example.

A third reason is of course that testosterone plateau's. Using more than a g per week is useless, so you need to add something else.

Good things come to those who weight.

The Big Cat is a researcher and theoreticist. His advice must never be taken in the stead of proper advice from a medical professional, it is entirely intended for research purposes.


ReplyQuote
hooker
(@hooker)
Active Member
Joined: 12 months ago
Posts: 5
24/06/2018 6:36 am  
Posted by: Big Cat
Thanx, i'd be careful about posting those huck finn cut and paste's, I see a lot of stuff in there that is not only entirely incorrect, but that was disproven some time ago. Especially in the first post with that class I and class II bull Bill Roberts concocted in some drunken fashion one night. It was never accepted, and frankly its far too simplistic to explain anything.

I've always said the same thing. It's nice how Huck re-posts other people's work/ideas in his own "articles" w/o giving them credit...and states them as accepted fact.


ReplyQuote
Page 2 / 2
Share:
  
Working

Please Login or Register