Is high dose test the most anabolic AAS protocol ?

[Rayzen]

Testosterone propionate vs trenbolone acetate on rats :

http://www.team-andro.com/trenbolon-wie-androgen.html

It's in german, but it's not very difficult to understand. (see graph and table)

Testosterone vs nandrolone on humans (on paper, nandrolone is little bit more anabolic than test) :

http://www.ergo-log.com/nantest.html

I am going to quote the last article :

"Anabolic steroids are made for use in small quantities. If you go for higher dosages, many of the positive characteristics no longer apply. In that case old-fashioned testosterone turns out to be more effective - and maybe also less risky."

I personnally do not agree with the less risky (see the prostate graph...)

Maybe stacking change things (Test + Tren VS High Test), maybe the lack of estrogen change things, but it seems that, on rats, high dose test > high dose tren or high dose nandrolone in terms of anabolic potency. Tren seems safer on the prostate...

 

[Rayzen]

By the way, I think that the goal is not to know that high dose testosterone is maybe ideal in term of anabolic potency, but the goal is to know how to mimic this anabolic potency with less side effects (especially on prostate) using various AAS.

 

[Valkyrie]

Whenever one of my experienced blast cruise guys hits a wall my FIRST avice is to to significantly up his test dose. Taking a gram? Go for 1750.

There is not much additional return for going over 2000.

 

[Mike Arnold]

Obviously, if it did not work very well we would not be seeing so many peole run 1, 2, or 3 grams of test weekly. Is test alone the "best" way to build mass? I don't think so. Gains can certainly be increased by adding other drugs to one's testosterone cycle, even if the test dosage is already very high. In terms of muscle srength, test only is not even close to the best way to go.

 

[the_predator]

As Mike said, right now I'm on 1900mg of test per week, but that's not the only thing I am on

 

[Rayzen]

Mike,

By saying that, you in fact speak about synergy.

Let's say you can use 4,000 mg of AAS each week before reaching receptors saturation.

Option A :
Test @ 4,000 mg / Week.

Option B :
Test @ 3,000 mg / Week.
Tren @ 1,000 mg / Week.

Option B bis.
Test @ 3,000 mg / Week.
Trestolone @ 1,000 mg / Week.

Option C :
Test @ 250 mg / Week
Trestolone @ 3,750 mg / Week.

Of course, let's imagine a context where there is no side effects (You put them out of the equation).

What would be the superior option in term purely of anabolic potency in this theorical scenario ?

 

[afg24]

Tren of course its 5x more anabolic than test

 

[Rayzen]

You didn't read the first post, didn't you ?

 

[Mudge]

I tried 1500mg for about 6 weeks with some other things, noticed more side effects than gains in my case. I prefer to stack. I too have heard the legends of "crazy gains over a gram" and it just didn't pan out for me the same as other things, i.e. tren or anadrol.

Also, a local guy who was active on the boards for years and who I knew "IRL" had a heart attack and died at 34. So make sure to get yourself checked often and don't think you'll live forever experimenting without watching your health.

 

[FordFan]

Not really related to the article, but 1,000mg of test plus hgh plus slin worked wanders for me. Normally stacking, I keep test around 750 then bump to 1,000 if I plateau.

 

[JerseyDevil]

In my last cycle I ramped from 1,000mg/wk to 1,750mg/wk over a 10 week period. I stacked with NPP. Results were good but over 1,250mg didn't seem do much except increase sides. For me, I get better results when stacking moderate dose of test, with a moderate dose of tren, and an oral like var or tbol (depending on goals).