Is it necessary to keep increasing doses?

[normalkev]

Is it necessary to constantly keep increasing doses per cycle? I just saw a video by chase irons on YouTube who stated there is no need to keep increasing doses if a certain dose worked in the past. For example, if someone ran the standard firsr 500 MG testosterone cycle that is recommended on multiple forums, if it works, can't one keep running that dose? The reality is most people will only gain 10 to 15 lbs of lean body mass if they do everything right on that cycle. I suppose I'm trying to be health conscious and keep to the minimum effective dose.

 

[normalkev]

Sorry, I think I posted this in the wrong section. Can a mod please move this to the cycle discussion section?

 

[CJ]

No, it's not necessarily required that one increases their dose. If it works, it works.

 

[normalkev]

Thank you, CJ. What are your thoughts on titraring doses up in a cycle? I'm currently running my first cycle at 300 test and 300 primo and plan on bumping up at the 1/2 way point to 400/400. I want to run the whole cycle for 16 weeks. Trying to use the least effective dose.

 

[TODAY]

Thank you, CJ. What are your thoughts on titraring doses up in a cycle? I'm currently running my first cycle at 300 test and 300 primo and plan on bumping up at the 1/2 way point to 400/400. I want to run the whole cycle for 16 weeks. Trying to use the least effective dose.

How long have you been on this current cycle?

 

[CJ]

Thank you, CJ. What are your thoughts on titraring doses up in a cycle? I'm currently running my first cycle at 300 test and 300 primo and plan on bumping up at the 1/2 way point to 400/400. I want to run the whole cycle for 16 weeks. Trying to use the least effective dose.

I have done that the last few cycles. It definitely makes sense on paper, whether there's any difference or not, I don't know how you could ever know.

 

[normalkev]

How long have you been on this current cycle?

About 2.5 weeks. I have preexisting gyno and did not want to run 500 MG test and play with an AI. I actually just started at the beginning with only 200 primo and 200 test to see how I reacted. I felt great so I bumped up the doses to 300 test and 300 primo about 4 days ago. Really love how I am not getting any sides so far. I tried 300 test last year alone and felt horrible and stopped after a few weeks. My goal is to put on 8 to 10 lbs lbm in 16 weeks. If my bloodwork is good, I would line to run this cycle for 20 weeks.

 

[Trenbolonely]

I think if you still make satisfying gains it’s better not to increase the dosage.
I’m currently running a cycle I already ran, as I didn’t stop gaining strength or mass when I decided to end it. My coach advised just to continue running the same protocol next time. if I stalled for a week, I reduced cardio and we just added more food, then the mass gain would continue. Seeing how food affected the gains made it clear sometimes you don’t need more mgs but more calories.

If you want to use least effective dose first try changing other variables like food/recovery/training to make a clear assessment as to whether it is actually the drugs that are lacking.

 

[Human_Backhoe]

About 2.5 weeks. I have preexisting gyno and did not want to run 500 MG test and play with an AI. I actually just started at the beginning with only 200 primo and 200 test to see how I reacted. I felt great so I bumped up the doses to 300 test and 300 primo about 4 days ago. Really love how I am not getting any sides so far. I tried 300 test last year alone and felt horrible and stopped after a few weeks. My goal is to put on 8 to 10 lbs lbm in 16 weeks. If my bloodwork is good, I would line to run this cycle for 20 weeks.

It won't even be fully saturated by week 4. What you are doing makes no sense. Leave it where it it. Make sure you eat enough.

Do you plan on PCT? How old are you?

 

[Test_subject]

More = better.

Growing on 500mg? Fuck it. Up the dose anyway. It’s not like AAS do damage to your health markers or anything.

 

[lifter6973]

More = better.

Growing on 500mg? Fuck it. Up the dose anyway. It’s not like AAS do damage to your health markers or anything.

@Valdosta

 

[normalkev]

It won't even be fully saturated by week 4. What you are doing makes no sense. Leave it where it it. Make sure you eat enough.

Do you plan on PCT? How old are you?

I'm 42, on TRT. I was already running 200 test and wanted to see if the primo with lower estrogen quickly. Probably should have waited 4 weeks to up it but it's done and I feel great.

 

[Human_Backhoe]

I'm 42, on TRT. I was already running 200 test and wanted to see if the primo with lower estrogen quickly. Probably should have waited 4 weeks to up it but it's done and I feel great.

There is nothing unreasonable about you doses. Just take it slow and train better. I commented on your journal question. Not being a dick. Want you to succeed

 

[TomJ]

It's my opinion that titrating on a fix cycle is just adding more complications for no reason.

Almost no one does it properly, gets bloodwork, ect.

It takes roughly 4 weeks to even tell how you're tolerating a particular dose of test e or c

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[Test_subject]

It's my opinion that titrating on a fix cycle is just adding more complications for no reason.

Almost no one does it properly, gets bloodwork, ect.

It takes roughly 4 weeks to even tell how you're tolerating a particular dose of test e or c

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

Titratiing cycles is silly and over complicated.

People wouldn’t run a six week cycle of a long estered compound, but they’ll up the dose for the final six weeks of a twelve week cycle like it’s going to do something.

 

[TomJ]

Titratiing cycles is silly and over complicated.

People wouldn’t run a six week cycle of a long estered compound, but they’ll up the dose for the final six weeks of a twelve week cycle like it’s going to do something.

Exactly, and that completely ignores the fact that the ester naturally titrates.

Same goes to tapering, stupid concept.


First cycle should always be test only, at a fixed dose, AI/nolva available if needed, and reducing the dose as a last resort.

Least complicated, least variables so that you can learn the most

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[BRICKS]

Is it necessary to constantly keep increasing doses per cycle? I just saw a video by chase irons on YouTube who stated there is no need to keep increasing doses if a certain dose worked in the past. For example, if someone ran the standard firsr 500 MG testosterone cycle that is recommended on multiple forums, if it works, can't one keep running that dose? The reality is most people will only gain 10 to 15 lbs of lean body mass if they do everything right on that cycle. I suppose I'm trying to be health conscious and keep to the minimum effective dose.

The reality is that people will gain a lot less than 10-15 lbs on a cycle. Go to the meat dept of your grocery store sometime and look at what 10-15 lbs of lean beef looks like. Sorry bro, but the rest is water and fat. And you absolutely do not need to be increasing AAS doses with successive cycles. Not sure why guys don't get this. You're not an elk growingva new rack every season. There are so many factors beside even training and diet and the scale to consider, many of which can be adjusted. Even something as seemingly insignificant as 1 extra day of rest a week can make a difference. I have had somebody tell me on this board that they need to run high doses of gear because "some of us aren't gifted genetically". Bullshit. Reexamine training, nutrition, sleep, hydration, lifestyle and habits, etc... and improve upon those things with respect toward meeting your goals. Throwing more hormones at it is like our gov throwing more money at something expecting a result.

Short answer to your OP: NO, you should be able to get repeated gains from 500mg test per week. Why would you take more than the minimum needed to get the result you want. My guess is a lack of full understanding of physiology/pharmacology coupled with unrealistic expectations.

 

[normalkev]

It won't even be fully saturated by week 4. What you are doing makes no sense. Leave it where it it. Make sure you eat enough.

Do you plan on PCT? How old are you?

I'm 42, on TRT. I was already running 200 test and wanted to see if the primo with lower estrogen quickly. Probably should have waited 4 weeks to up it but it's

Exactly, and that completely ignores the fact that the ester naturally titrates.

Same goes to tapering, stupid concept.


First cycle should always be test only, at a fixed dose, AI/nolva available if needed, and reducing the dose as a last resort.

Least complicated, least variables so that you can learn the most

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

Thanks, I completely understand. I tried a test prop cycle last year which did not go well. I developed heart palpitations which disappeared after I stopped the cycle. That was my lesson learned that I don't seem to do well with very high test levels.

Trying a different approach this time with the primo and lower test. Also titrating the dose to see how my body reacts so i have some knowledge for future cycles if I do one again.

 

[normalkev]

The reality is that people will gain a lot less than 10-15 lbs on a cycle. Go to the meat dept of your grocery store sometime and look at what 10-15 lbs of lean beef looks like. Sorry bro, but the rest is water and fat. And you absolutely do not need to be increasing AAS doses with successive cycles. Not sure why guys don't get this. You're not an elk growingva new rack every season. There are so many factors beside even training and diet and the scale to consider, many of which can be adjusted. Even something as seemingly insignificant as 1 extra day of rest a week can make a difference. I have had somebody tell me on this board that they need to run high doses of gear because "some of us aren't gifted genetically". Bullshit. Reexamine training, nutrition, sleep, hydration, lifestyle and habits, etc... and improve upon those things with respect toward meeting your goals. Throwing more hormones at it is like our gov throwing more money at something expecting a result.

Short answer to your OP: NO, you should be able to get repeated gains from 500mg test per week. Why would you take more than the minimum needed to get the result you want. My guess is a lack of full understanding of physiology/pharmacology coupled with unrealistic expectations.

There is nothing unreasonable about you doses. Just take it slow and train better. I commented on your journal question. Not being a dick. Want you to succeed

Thank you, I appreciate your feedback and advice.

 

[normalkev]

The reality is that people will gain a lot less than 10-15 lbs on a cycle. Go to the meat dept of your grocery store sometime and look at what 10-15 lbs of lean beef looks like. Sorry bro, but the rest is water and fat. And you absolutely do not need to be increasing AAS doses with successive cycles. Not sure why guys don't get this. You're not an elk growingva new rack every season. There are so many factors beside even training and diet and the scale to consider, many of which can be adjusted. Even something as seemingly insignificant as 1 extra day of rest a week can make a difference. I have had somebody tell me on this board that they need to run high doses of gear because "some of us aren't gifted genetically". Bullshit. Reexamine training, nutrition, sleep, hydration, lifestyle and habits, etc... and improve upon those things with respect toward meeting your goals. Throwing more hormones at it is like our gov throwing more money at something expecting a result.

Short answer to your OP: NO, you should be able to get repeated gains from 500mg test per week. Why would you take more than the minimum needed to get the result you want. My guess is a lack of full understanding of physiology/pharmacology coupled with unrealistic expectations.

You're right, i think 10-15 is a optimistic goal. Maybe 5 lb to 10 lb is more of a realistic expectation. I suppose there are so many factors that go into this such as genetic response, age, training, calories, rest, stress, etc.