Muscle Chemistry Archive

How Much Do Natural Testosterone Levels Decrease Per Year As You Get Older?

Many health authorities state that natural Testosterone levels decrease by 1% per year.This figure is incorrect, and is not based on bioavailable Testosterone.[embedded content]Once men enter their 30’s and start to get closer to being middle-aged, their endogenous Testosterone production starts to steadily decline.This is well understood, but how accurate is the 1% per year figure commonly thrown around?In general, not very accurate when all things are considered.On the surface, total testosterone levels decline by 0.8 to 1.6 percent on average in men over the age of 40 [R].But, that’s not the value that actually matters.Most will look at total testosterone levels as a way to measure adequate hormone levels.The fact is, you could have a 900 ng/dL total testosterone level and still experience low testosterone symptoms if you don’t have an optimal SHBG and free testosterone level.At the end of the day, free testosterone levels will show you exactly how much testosterone is actually available to be used in tissues.If you have high testosterone production, but more of it is being bound up by SHBG and albumin than should be, it won’t matter what your total testosterone level is on paper.If you have a sky high total testosterone level, but a very low free testosterone level, you will not have enough usable testosterone available to tissues to support optimal function.With that in mind, we have to also consider the fact that sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) levels increase by 1.6% per year [R].Not only do natural testosterone levels decrease, but we also have a concurrent increase in the main protein in the body responsible for binding up usable testosterone and preventing it from transcribing its effects in tissues.As you would expect taking both factors into consideration, free testosterone levels in the body decline even more substantially.With total testosterone levels decreasing, there is less testosterone in the body, and with an increase in SHBG, even more of that further declining testosterone gets rendered unusable.Because of this, bioavailable testosterone levels decrease by 2 to 3 percent per year on average.2 to 3 percent of your usable testosterone per year is substantial, and expectedly will often eventually lead to significant detriment to quality of life.Now, how is this random statistic useful to real world application?Well, armed with this knowledge you can more accurately interpret blood work, and I will detail exactly what tests you need to get done to actually assess your hormone profile.Most doctors are quick to send you packing if your total testosterone levels are in range, even if you still have chronic low testosterone symptoms.First of all, most doctors have no idea what the difference between total and free testosterone levels are, and secondly, most of the doctors who know what the difference is still have no idea how to order accurate high sensitivity hormone testing.On paper you could have a total testosterone level of 800 ng/dL but still experience horrendous low testosterone symptoms if free testosterone, estradiol and SHBG aren’t being tested properly.Most of the time, a doctor will write you a requisition to get your hormones assessed via a primitive methodology known as electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA).This is an outdated assay that is not accurate, especially if you use exogenous hormones.It is not uncommon to have a critical hormone incorrectly show as “healthy” in the middle of the reference range when high sensitivity testing would reveal that you are actually severely deficient.I have verified this now several times myself with both Estrogen testing and Testosterone testing.At minimum, these are the exact tests you should be getting to assess your hormone profile:Total Testosterone determined using liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS-MS)Free Testosterone determined using Equilibrium Dialysis or Equilibrium UltrafiltrationEstradiol determined using liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS-MS)Sex Hormone binding Globulin, Serum (SHBG)DHT, DHEA and Pregnenolone would be useful to have too, but the tests above are the main ones that will ultimately determine if you are functioning at a high level or not.To simplify things, this is the comprehensive blood test I recommend that you get to assess your health as a whole: Male Athletic Anti-Aging PanelIt is the best overall panel offered for men in all regards for health status evaluation, but the garbage Testosterone testing using direct analog enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and ECLIA is what is included in the panel.You will need to add Testosterone, Free, Equilibrium Ultrafiltration With Total Testosterone, LC/MS-MS separately to your cart as the comprehensive panel I recommend only comes with sensitive assay Estradiol testing.Related

Science.bio Review – SARMs, Nootropics And Anti-Aging Product Quality

Science.bio is a SARMs source that was brought to my attention earlier this year.My first impression of this company was that they have a very impressive looking website with a clean layout, and their product quality control appeared to be head and shoulders above the rest of the industry.There is less than a handful of other companies in the entire industry that have as stringent purity testing across their entire product line.Science.bio has A LOT of different products, and to my surprise, they were all third party tested.Not just COA’s.Not just one third party test for a batch they produced a year ago.But third party testing for every single product, for every single batch ever manufactured.When I saw that, I knew this wasn’t your run of the mill SARMs company who hired a good web designer to set up a nice looking Shopify page and was looking to make a quick buck.Most companies that get on my radar don’t make it past a quick 5 minute scope of their website because they are always missing some key element I feel is critical to make a great company.Whether that be a lack of sufficient quality control and third party testing, irresponsible marketing, questionable product offerings, or a number of other things I look out for, 99% of companies screw up at least one major thing I consider mandatory for me to even consider incorporating their products into my personal research.Science.bio made it past my initial assessment, as well as my more thorough assessment I completed afterwards.This entailed digging into their company track record, unbiased reviews online, as well as asking friends for feedback who are highly respected in this industry.They made it past my follow-up assessment too.I decided to put an order in afterwards to evaluate the product quality first hand.Keep in mind, the quality of SARMs varies enormously between different sources in this industry.In an investigation involving chemical analyses of 44 products marketed as SARMs and sold via the internet, only 52% contained SARMs at all, and many were inaccurately labeled [R].ACCURATELY DOSED SARMs will produce repeatable results that are selective for anabolic effects in muscle or bone tissues with a relative absence of androgenic effects in tissues such as the prostate gland at therapeutic dosages.POOR QUALITY SARMs on the other hand, will generally offer nothing (because they are underdosed or completely bunk), or may even be tainted with liver toxic methylated Prohormones (which are now illegal).If you are researching with compounds like SARMs that suppress endocrine function and can have varying levels of health implications, then it pays to get the best SARMs you can to ensure you can predict with far greater accuracy exactly what to expect, and how to tackle any potential side effects or obstacles that may occur during experimentation.Unfortunately, in this industry cutting corners when it comes to quality control is a given with almost every single company.There are hundreds of SARMs suppliers out there and I’ve tried a lot of them over the years (I’ve personally been researching SARMs for half a decade).From the type you buy in local supplement stores with overly-hyped up aggressive packaging (horrible marketing practice as they aren’t dietary supplements), to the companies that swear their liquid SARMs are stronger than all capsule SARMs, to the seemingly good suppliers that have been around for years.I’ve experienced such a vast array of product quality over the years between all of these companies that I can’t stress enough how important transparent testing is when it comes to yielding accurate results in your research.Table of ContentsMy Supplier Requirement ChecklistOver the years I have developed some specific criteria that I feel a SARMs company should meet if I am to give them my business.This is based on my past experiences with good and bad companies.In terms of SARMs quality, I believe the more a company meets these criteria, the higher quality the SARMs are likely to be.My requirements are as follows:Third Party TestingI don’t recommend buying SARMs from a company that doesn’t pay for third party testing. Period.Third party testing for every product SKU is a bare minimum, and ideally there would be third party test results for every single batch manufactured of every single SKU for full transparency.This is what separates the men from the boys when it comes to SARMs quality control.Simply put, I am not going to compromise my research by risking it with some random company that has no proof of consistently high product purity.It baffles me how many people will completely ruin their experiments just to save a few bucks on their order with some garbage fly-by-night company.LegalityThere are a lot of research chemical companies nowadays, and one thing I find crazy is how many sell blatantly illegal substances.Personally, I think all drugs should be legal, but the fact remains that they aren’t, so there are some key things I look for when I am assessing a SARMs company’s legal compliance and risk profile.If a company sells SARMs, but then they also sell a myriad of Rx only/scheduled compounds, it is a bit sketchy and it is likely not a company I want to be trusting my money with when there is an impending ban on SARMs.To be frank, from a legal standpoint, SARMs have yet to be scheduled (in my country at least, you should double check where you live if they are legal before you buy SARMs from anyone), so if there is a company that is commingling their legal products with illegal products and selling everything they can get away with, it’s probably not a good sign for their longevity, and likely not a good sign for their quality control procedures.No Hyped Up MarketingI don’t recommend buying from companies that go out of their way to market SARMs as legal steroids with no side effects for extreme bodybuilding purposes, or as dietary supplements in general.The more a company markets SARMs as hardcore bodybuilding compounds with aggressively hyped up expectations, the worse the SARMs usually are.Not only is the product usually of lower quality with these companies, this sort of behavior is also what gives people the wrong idea about SARMs and only increases the chances of them being made illegal (which is probably inevitable at this point already).To be clear, these are not dietary supplements, so if a company is labeling them that way, they’ve already blown it in my books, and the aggressive marketing is just icing on the cake.Don’t be seduced by this aggressive, misguided marketing, and don’t support it.Why I Think Science.bio Is An Excellent Source To Buy SARMs From OnlineScience.bio goes the extra mile not just to third party test their products, but they also pay for NMR, FTIR, HPLC, LC-MS, GC-MS, TLC, ICP-MS, Gravimetry, UV-Vis, Titration, Melting Point and Organoleptic analysis.Elaborate, extensive testing is conducted on every single batch, of every single one of their product SKU’s.They repeat this process for every single batch of product they manufacture, not just one random batch a year ago that they had tested just so they could show results on their website as a marketing ploy (what most companies do, if they even third party test at all).This is one of the few companies I don’t have to worry about my results being skewed by inconsistent quality control.With other SARMs companies, you need to account for a huge margin of error, and frankly, no research findings are even credible in any capacity with products coming from 99% of other sources because of this.Extensive Third Party Testing And Quality ControlEvery single batch of every single product they sell is third party tested.Most SARMs companies literally don’t have a clue what’s in the products that they are selling you.There are SO many companies out there that claim they are third party tested, have HPLC results showing that their products are 99% pure, blah blah blah, but then when you ask to see their third party tests, they either don’t have anything to show you, or they show you a Certificate of Analysis (COA) from their raws supplier in China.A COA, is NOT the same thing as third party testing.A COA is a document that the Chinese supplier can doctor however they want, and likely doesn’t even show true results, as most of these companies (literally 99% of companies) are NOT paying an unbiased third party lab to test their products for them.The only way you can know for certain what you are getting is legitimate is by literally paying thousands of dollars out of your own pocket to send your products to a third party lab, and have them perform a completely unbiased test on your products, and then send you those results.COA’s mean nothing.Science.bio products are batch and lot coded with publicly visible lab reports.This level of transparency and commitment to quality control seriously impressed me.Their testing also ensures that their products are free of adulterants, excipients and flow agents to ensure purity.Small factors that most companies would completely overlook Science.bio clearly takes very seriously.For example, their products are slightly over-weighed to compensate for loss by adhesion.They also promise less than 5% variance in concentration per lot, guaranteeing consistency.Science.bio SARMs, Nootropics, and all of their other product offerings are accurately dosed, consistently accurately dosed, and this holds true across their entire product lineup.It is not just exclusive to 1 or 2 products that they felt would net them a bigger profit.To read more about their elaborate quality control process, including how they source their raws, quarantine them for third party testing, review third party analysis results, and test their raws in-house again for purity confirmation, check out the Science.bio quality control page, and their frequently asked questions page.PricesI am shocked at how many people will completely compromise their research using some random company that has zero credibility, proof of product purity, or proof of consistency just to save $5-10 per product in their order.I would rather pay several times more to ensure what I am getting is not only what it is supposed to be, but meets label claims.Fortunately, the handfuls of truly credible companies in this industry do not charge multiple times more than the crap people are buying, even though it would be more than justified.All things considered, Science.bio MAJORLY underprices their products.Their prices are on par, or cheaper than complete garbage companies out there with websites that look like they were made by a 10 year old, monkeys working their customer service, and zero quality control.I wouldn’t be surprised if Science.bio’s profit margins are the lowest in the industry given how much goes into their presentation and strict quality control.Frankly, I don’t even like using pricing as a metric of whether a company is good or bad when they are doing everything right and pouring the majority of their revenue back into the company with the elaborate level of purity analysis that Science.bio uses.Evidently, Science.bio still manages to maintain competitive pricing because of economies of scale in manufacturing and quality control.They order in volume, have good connections (largely influenced by their ties to IRC.bio), and have an organized infrastructure that allows them to stay competitive with pricing.Any person with reasonable intelligence can tell that the retail price of a SARM often does not reflect the value you are getting either.If you order a bottle of LGD-4033 from Science.bio and can see with complete transparency that their product consistently meets label claims via potency audits and batch purity analysis, what is the actual value of that product relative to another company with the same price or a $5 cheaper price tag?Well, the probability that the other company is bunk is nearly 50% without even delving into their quality control.Then, the probability that their current batch for sale is accurately dosed is extremely low.Even if it is third party tested and has published test results for you to view, what are the chances that those test results reflect the purity of the batch that they will actually be sending you and isn’t an old test result?Were those results analyzed by qualified professionals and used as a reference point for further testing and purity confirmation in-house?I rest my case.Science.bio is truly a diamond in the rough of this trash infested industry.I would rather pay double to ensure I’m getting what I paid for.Hell, I’d even pay triple.And then there is Joe Shmoe in Facebook groups asking if anybody has heard of (insert fly-by-night company name here) SARMs because he thinks that their blend consisting of 4 different products and their $5 cheaper prices are more attractive than actually getting what you paid for.If you get a massively underdosed product, or something else entirely (the chances are disturbingly high that this will happen with most SARMs sources), did you really save any money at the end of the day?No, you spent more money for less of what you were paying for, and your results/reports will be useless to reference.Product Presentation And Website LayoutAttention to minor details is clear even during the packaging process of their products.They use PET single-wall jars and glass bottles with UV resistance to minimize degradation.The packaging is also designed to prevent evaporation in storage and maximize product shelf life.They also manufacture their products with tamper-proof seals to ensure safety in transit.Their liquid solutions even contain a graduated 1 mL pipette for convenient measurement.Pre-mixed liquid suspensions as well as raw powders are available for most of the products sold on the site as well, which is ideal for researchers like myself.These kind of details set Science.bio apart even further from the rest in this industry.It is clear that the individuals behind this company are veterans, and it shines through not just with their meticulous quality control, but even with their packaging and website presentation.If a company doesn’t take the time to make an easy to navigate website with a user-friendly checkout menu, or get high quality images of their products and accompanying graphics, to me that just shows that they are willing to cut corners.The more a company is willing to cut corners in one aspect or another, the more likely this lack of pride in presentation will bleed into quality control.The Science.bio website looks amazing and their product presentation is fantastic.Customer ServiceThe customer service at Science.bio is excellent.I would expect no less when dealing with an organization as professional as this.Science.bio offers quick and friendly support should you need it.When I had a question about an order I made, my inquiry was answered promptly and thoroughly.The Different SARMs for SaleAs you should know, different SARMs possess different properties than one another, despite all operating via a very similar mechanism of action.They are all intended to be non-steroidal and exert tissue-selective anabolic effects in muscle and bone, while sparing other androgenic effects that come from anabolic androgenic steroids (AAS).To make things easier for you, I’ve made a table to show you each of the most well known and researched SARMs, and broken them up into varying levels of endocrine suppression, as well as separated the compounds that are not SARMs at all, but are commonly lumped into the SARM category.You can also read through all of the notable clinical research conducted on each compound in an organized format, as well as my personal interpretation of the research and anecdotal findings of each compound linked below:Science.bio is the only company that stocks every single one of these compounds, and has transparent potency audits and batch purity analysis for every single batch they produce of each of these products.Usually a SARMs source will be missing S23, or LGD-3303, or another more obscure SARM that does not have as much demand as the more mainstream compounds.Science.bio offers everything, all with verified elite purity and batch consistency.Other Product OfferingsScience.bio has an elaborate catalog of products for sale.These range from SARMs to Nootropics, to hard to source stimulants, to anti-aging and longevity enhancing agents, and even some of the very obscure hair loss prevention compounds that I experiment with.NootropicsSome of the most notable Nootropics available right now that caught my eye are Noopept, Methylene Blue, Phenylpiracetam, Dihexa and Phenibut.I am a big fan of acute Phenibut usage for enhancing social freedom.Noopept, Methylene Blue, Phenylpiracetam and Dihexa all stack exceptionally well with Gorilla Mind Rush and Gorilla Mind Smooth as well for intense focus and productivity.StimulantsThis really piqued my interest.Science.bio carries some exotic stimulants that can be very difficult to source domestically.Especially when it comes to finding them on their own and not jammed in some fly-by-night supplement company’s garbage pre-workout supplement.Some of these include, 1,3-DMAA, Flmodafinil (CRL-40,940) and 1,4-DMAA.Anti-Aging & LongevityI’ve started to transition into a significant amount of anti-aging and longevity research as of late, and it was nice to see that several of the most novel agents being evaluated right now for potential therapeutic applications are offered by Science.bio as well.Some of these include NMN (Nicotinamide Mononucleotide), Resveratrol, Pterostilbene and NAD+.Hair Loss PreventionScience.bio has started to expand their product line to include compounds developed for hair loss prevention as well.The compounds currently in their catalog that I have experience with and have shown therapeutic promise include RU58841, CB-03-01 and Setipiprant.Where to Buy SARMs Internationally?Science.bio ships worldwide with free shipping on international orders over $300.They will ship anywhere SARMs are currently legal.BEFORE you buy SARMs, check if these products are legal in your country.Check the laws in your country prior to buying anything online to make sure it is compliant where you live with your current government laws.Cryptocurrency DiscountScience.bio offers an additional 5% discount at checkout for those who use Cryptocurrency as their form of payment.If you order Science.bio products with Cryptocurrency to get a discount on your orders, checkout Coinbase HERE.I believe Coinbase is the most user friendly exchange to buy Bitcoin/Cryptocurrency from.My Science.bio Review In SummaryAfter thoroughly reviewing their quality control procedures, customer service, presentation, and general practices, I would not hesitate to recommend Science.bio SARMs, Nootropics, or any other product offerings currently in their catalog.From receiving and sampling raws to transparent batch and lot tracking, to extensive third party testing, to in-house analysis review and further testing, you would be hard-pressed to find another company in the entire industry that can stack up to Science.bio in all aspects.The entire company is on a different level than 99% of other companies, and you are going to be in good hands ordering from them.Science.bio Discount CodeDespite already offering very competitive pricing, there are discount codes available to use at checkout.At checkout, you can use the Science.bio discount code “DC10” to save 10% on your entire order.Science.bio 99%+ Pure Third Party Tested SARMsDisclaimer: The information included in this article is intended for entertainment and informational purposes only. It is not intended nor implied to be a substitute for professional medical advice. Prior to buying anything, check that it is compliant where you live with your current government laws. Science.bio Review Product Name: SARMs, Nootropics And Longevity CompoundsBrand: Science.bioOverall4.9Third Party TestingAccurate DosingPricingBatch Consistency

Related

Testosterone Dosage For Bodybuilding | The Highest Dose Of Testosterone I Would Use

In this article I detail what I wish somebody taught me before I started using anabolics about the ideal testosterone dosage to use during a bulking phase.When I first got into bodybuilding, I started researching bodybuilding pharmacology like a maniac.I was on the forums daily, I would rack the brains of guys I considered veterans in the community, I would listen to gurus, and I would scour the internet for anything I could find.For the last decade I’ve been absorbing information, and filtering out the crap.As you’ve probably experienced first hand, there is A LOT of garbage that circulates in this community.Unfortunately, when I first started researching there weren’t nearly as many credible sources of information in the community.The logical conclusion you make as a newbie is that the guy who is older and bigger than you probably knows more than you, so you should probably take what they say as solid advice.I did this a lot, and I also took a lot of theories to heart that weren’t backed with any science.With that being said, personal experience is still very important.A research paper can only tell you so many things about X compound before you need to just try it for yourself to really have valuable insight on its potential benefits and drawbacks in a bodybuilding context.My personal experience and research has led me to many conclusions that I wouldn’t have been able to wrap my head around even a few years ago, let alone when I first started learning about this stuff.Table of ContentsThe Point Of Using A Testosterone BaseOne of the most misunderstood concepts in our community is the Testosterone base.I had heard for years that Testosterone needs to be a base for every single steroid cycle.No matter what, you needed to have Testosterone in there.Logically, this makes sense on the surface.We naturally produce Testosterone, so if you shut down your hypothalamic–pituitary–gonadal axis (HPG axis) with exogenous steroids then you would need to replace your Testosterone production with exogenous Testosterone.That was as far as anyone would explain the point of a Test base though, and for several years I accepted that as best practice.At a higher level, despite the fact that a Test base is still something that will be beneficial for the vast majority of AAS users, it is important to understand why you are injecting a steroid to begin with.Why exactly is an oral-only cycle a poor choice at a higher level than your gym bro telling you “if you don’t use Test you will get f*cked up!”Well, the main reason you need Testosterone is not just to activate androgen receptors and transcribe anabolic and androgenic effects in tissues in the body, but also it is to aromatize into a sufficient amount of Estrogen to fulfill a myriad of other physiological functions.Only in recent years has the importance of adequate Estrogen levels been highlighted even by experts in the community, and the previous dogma in the community up until the last few years was that Estrogen is bad and you should use an Aromatase Inhibitor to lower Estrogen to the middle of the reference range no matter what.Little consideration was given for the androgen to Estrogen ratio in the body, the fat loss and growth factor inhibiting effect unnecessarily lowering Estrogen can have, or the massive impact Estrogen has on lipid modulation.The clinical data also suggests how neuroprotective and cardioprotective Testosterone is relative to other anabolic steroids, but often fails to acknowledge that this effect may not be mediated by Testosterone at all, rather, it is the Estrogen that is created as a result of aromatization in the body.Give a man a bunch of any drug that suppresses Testosterone production to nearly zero and you will see a subsequent spike in neurotoxicity and cardiotoxicity.Creating a therapeutic amount of Estradiol in your body is mediated through Testosterone aromatizing into Estrogen.While there are synthetic steroids that have proven to act on Estrogen receptors, or aromatize into Estrogen themselves, they have inherent flaws that cannot match the bioidentical androgen our body modulates in all aspects with far greater ease.Dianabol aromatizes into 17α-methylestradiol and is inherently hepatotoxic.Equipoise (Boldenone) is a poor substrate for aromatase and is incredibly kidney toxic relative to Testosterone.Trestolone aromatizes into 7α-methylestradiol and could potentially become a viable “test base” alternative, but for the time being, its therapeutic efficacy in this context still lags behind the obvious go to which is bioidentical Testosterone.Nandrolone is a very poor substrate for aromatase and will not maintain healthy levels of Estradiol relative to the androgen load exerted on the body, even at high dosages.While certain steroids can activate Estrogen receptors or aromatize into Estrogens themselves, none fit the bill for a perfect balancing act in all aspects like bioidentical Testosterone does.The 3 Categories Of SteroidsThe anabolic steroids we use for bodybuilding more or less break down into 3 different categories that you should understand thoroughly.Testosterone (and its derivatives), DHT Derivatives, and 19-Nor’s.Testosterone And Its DerivativesThe main steroids we concern ourselves with in this category include Testosterone, Dianabol and Equipoise.Aside from Trestolone, these are the only notable steroids that provide enough Estrogenic activity to function as “bases” of a cycle.DHT DerivativesThe main steroids we concern ourselves with in this category include Masteron, Proviron, Winstrol, Primobolan, Anavar, Anadrol and Superdrol.DHT derivatives are not substrates for aromatase and thus have minimal estrogenic activity (with the exception of Anadrol). 19-Nortestosterone (Nandrolone) DerivativesThe main steroids we concern ourselves with in this category include Nandrolone, Trenbolone and Trestolone (MENT).The Point Of Stacking Other Anabolics With TestosteroneThe main purpose of the Testosterone base is to maintain a physiologic amount of Estrogen that you would otherwise lose when your endocrine system is shut down in the presence of exogenous androgens.Once this function is fulfilled and you have that therapeutic level of Estradiol (E2) fulfilled via a base of Testosterone, what are you doing above and beyond that that’s helping you in a bodybuilding context?When I was first getting into my research I would commonly see 500 mg of Testosterone per week being deemed a “newbie cycle” dosage, and a Test base during a cycle was no less than 500 mg per week in every single cycle thereafter when stacked alongside other compounds.The dosage of Testosterone proposed in the “ideal” newbie cycle is so high that you already have guys on their first cycle forced to use Aromatase Inhibitors to prevent Estrogenic side effects.In general, if you need to use an aromatase inhibitor to use a certain dosage of Testosterone, I would deem that dosage of Testosterone too high for you.Testosterone is a great muscle building hormone, but oftentimes there are better ways to get the job done with lower overall stress on the body.Remember, Testosterone is one of the most primitive steroids there is.All steroids developed after Testosterone were synthesized in attempts to make a more tissue selective hormone than Testosterone in order to be used in a clinical setting with higher levels of tolerability.Tolerability, virilization, and health/biomarker impact are three very different metrics to assess the overall safety profile of a compound.The ideal anabolic agent would induce a significant amount of anabolic activity, with a relative lack of impact on biomarkers and masculinization.This is easier said than done though.This is what drove chemists to continue synthesizing new steroids after discovering Testosterone.You can’t inject a woman with a bunch of Testosterone to prevent muscle wasting without inducing severe virilizing side effects.Expectedly, more tissue selective alternatives that can induce the same anabolic activity with less side effects are more ideal in a therapeutic setting.This is also why the development of SARMs is very promising.This is where compounds like Primobolan, Anavar and Nandrolone showed such therapeutic promise too.With that being said, anabolic/androgenic ratios aren’t the end all be all that we should base our compound choices on, and oftentimes they are completely incorrect (e.g. with Winstrol).When To Stack Other Steroids With TestosteroneTaking this all into consideration, if muscle growth with a minimization of negative health impact is the goal, this is what I would suggest.After ensuring you have a physiologic amount of testosterone as your base at minimum, would it be wiser to increase your Testosterone dosage into the stratosphere and force yourself to introduce adjunct ancillary drugs to continue breaking plateaus, or introduce anabolic steroids that complement your base.Well, that depends on your genetic propensity to aromatization among numerous factors, but in general, I would say that the most intelligent approach to creating a steroid cycle should be increasing Testosterone as much as you can get away with until the need for an aromatase inhibitor presents itself.Obviously I’m not suggesting you do this on a first cycle, or perhaps even a second or third cycle, but I’m trying to lay out a framework to determine when/if it is justified for you to start stacking on top of your base.As long as Testosterone dosages are slowly tapered upwards as you gain muscle mass, side effects can be kept to a minimum with greater ease than most other compounds.The exception to this are androgenic side effects, but for the sake of this article being focused on bodybuilding outcomes and health, I will be disregarding hair loss/androgenic side effects when I lay out this framework.The synergy between Testosterone and more tissue selective alternatives will always give better results on a milligram for milligram basis, but the impact that total milligram amount per week has on your health, and other things you may or may not care about (e.g. your hair) is what you need to take into consideration.Testosterone wins over all other compounds when you factor in everything with exception of androgenic side effects, but there comes a point for the majority of individuals where more Testosterone is just not feasible without forcing the user to introduce an AI.For those who can blast Test into the sky with no side effects, frankly, they’d probably be better off using a slowly titrating dose of Testosterone to continue breaking plateaus with all things considered (finances, bloodwork, long term health ramifications, etc.).But, for those who are very prone to estrogenic side effects, stacking will be necessary if your goals in muscle accrual exceed what you can accomplish with a moderate dosage of Testosterone. Testosterone will produce dose-dependent increases in muscle mass.We already know this.However, once you hit a certain dose (individual dependent), you will be forced to introduce adjunct drugs just to mitigate side effects, which will also impair other important biomarkers and hinder muscle growth.This dosage is typically around the 300-400 mg Testosterone per week mark for many individuals.If you don’t need an AI though and your body is extremely efficient at balancing androgens relative to estrogens, then by all means, push the Testosterone higher instead without stacking if your biomarkers indicate that it is the healthier choice for you.Testosterone has proven time and time again to be the most forgiving steroid on health markers and it is more than sufficient to grow a physique to IFBB pro standards.Pharmaceutical grade Testosterone is also relatively easy to find for a fair price, whereas pharmaceutical grade Primobolan, Anavar, Nandrolone and Anadrol are commonly faked, or very expensive.How To Know What Compounds To Choose In Your StackOnce you get to a point where you’re forced to use an AI just to use a higher dose of Testosterone, was it a wise choice to use that much Testosterone in the first place?Personally, I believe that is where introducing a DHT derivative would then be justified rather than increasing your Testosterone dosage even higher.The DHT derivative will accomplish the following:Exhibits inherent anabolic effects itself and are typically well tolerated (several DHT derivatives are decent muscle builders).Some can bind with SHBG, consequently freeing up more Testosterone to be used in tissues. Thus making your current dose of Testosterone work “better”.Some can antagonize Estrogen, consequently reducing your need for an AI. This may even give you more wiggle room to increase your Testosterone dose even higher without needing an AI.Only once you’ve plateaued from a cycle comprised of a Test base and a DHT derivative do I believe you should even consider introducing a 19-Nor, as they are the least forgiving on health markers, despite their superior anabolic/androgenic tissue selectivity.All steroids accomplish the same thing at the end of the day more or less, so how they are used in your protocol should be based on your propensity to side effects and individual specific biomarkers.In addition, your tolerance to androgenic activity needs to be factored in, as managing hair loss and other androgenic side effects on hormones is a totally different ballgame than managing side effects in a completely health focused context.While you can get to 260+ pounds lean on a bunch of Testosterone (if you have great genetics), could you have not accomplished the same thing with a much lower androgen load, or without needing to pop AI’s like candy to tolerate the dosage of Testosterone needed to support that much lean muscle growth?This is what I wish I learned about sooner, because it wasn’t until after I finished trying to chase bodybuilding goals that I feel I really started to understand more optimal practices.Misconceptions Surrounding Certain CompoundsCertain compounds that are very effective get completely overlooked because of their relative lack of potency, and oftentimes even their relative lack of side effects.“Wet” compounds like Dbol will give the user an inflated look as a result of its conversion to 17α-methylestradiol.If something bloats you up 10 pounds nearly overnight, does that mean it is a more effective muscle builder than something dry but less dramatic due to its relative lack of side effects?No, I don’t think so.Compounds like Primobolan will get overlooked because of this, and they are seen as “girl steroids”.If you’re in this for the long haul, long term muscle growth is our goal with the least impact on our health possible.There are very few compounds that edge out Primobolan in this regard, despite yielding what may be perceived to be better increases in size in the short term.The reality is, there are several commonly overlooked compounds with better outcomes than commonly reached for steroids not only in a clinical setting, but in a bodybuilding context as well in the long-term.Comparing someone waterlogged on a Test, Nandrolone and Dbol cycle to someone on a Test, Primobolan and Nandrolone cycle, the guy on Dbol might appear to be making significantly more progress at a much faster rate, but are those outcomes just inflated by the guy being waterlogged?Or are they actually yielding more nitrogen retention and lean muscle accrual with their inclusion of Dbol?The side effect profile of the second cycle would be far more tolerable and still yield nearly identical gains in muscle mass all things considered.Keep this in mind when you’re designing your cycles.How I Would Approach A Blast PhaseIf somebody outlined these concepts to me when I was younger I could have significantly reduced my dosages and avoided so much unnecessary hair loss, cardiovascular stress, oxidative stress, and organ stress in general.My dosages were excessive for my goals was the main issue, which I outline further in my article detailing my first cycle.If I were to design subsequent blast phases for myself now (and hair loss wasn’t a concern), it would follow the framework I outlined earlier in the article.Testosterone DosageI would use a base of 300 mg Testosterone per week split into everyday administrations.My Testosterone dosage would titrate up to as high as my body can tolerate without needing an AI or substantial detriment to my health markers during the subsequent cycle.DHT DerivativesPrimobolanIn the subsequent cycle I would introduce a DHT derivative like Primobolan if I hit a wall with my titrating Testosterone dosage.By hit a wall, I mean that I am put in a position where I need more AAS, but increasing my Testosterone dosage any further would result in me needing to introduce an AI to prevent significant estrogenic side effects from occurring.So, instead of increasing Testosterone further and using an AI, at that point we can look to the DHT derivative family.The dosage of Primobolan would titrate up as needed based on SHBG and Free Testosterone levels (Primo doesn’t bind well to SHBG, but the dosage would still be based on what my limits are with Testosterone titration), estrogenic activity in the body, biomarkers, and my tolerability of 19-Nor’s.19-Nortestosterone (Nandrolone) DerivativesNandroloneNandrolone is my choice of 19-Nor that would be introduced several cycles later once my body had plateaued from all of the previous blast phases where I had already peaked my Test base dosage and tried a subsequent cycle of a Test base with Primobolan.Advanced AAS Protocol FrameworkThe foundation of each blast phase after I deem my body had reached an “advanced” stage of AAS use again would likely include Testosterone as my base, Primobolan and Nandrolone.While certain compounds could be considered interchangeable, I see no need to rotate compounds in and out during a mass building phase.The primary growth promoters of that stack are Testosterone and Nandrolone, but the dosages of each would be highly dependent on individual gene expression and health markers (as well as basic things like blood pressure).I’ve been on therapeutic TRT for years so I would milk this compound progression again if I wanted to experience significant progress without needing to jump straight into an advanced stack.It should take you at least a couple years of cycling before you work your body up to a point where a protocol designed using advanced cycle framework is even necessary to deploy to break muscle building plateaus.Related

Why You Still Aren’t Shredded Eating Less Than 2000 Calories Per Day

One of the most common obstacles guys run into during a cutting phase is plateauing in fat loss when they are eating less than 2000 calories per day, which is what I consider to be an unsustainable amount of calories for the majority of men.I get messages all the time from guys who have dropped their intake under 2000 calories per day and cannot get any leaner asking me what to do to break their plateau.“Derek, I’m cutting on 1600 calories, I am 12% body fat and I want to get down to 7% body fat, what do I do?”This is the most common mistake I see and it can completely ruin your cut by unnecessarily downregulating your metabolism.In scenarios like this, the root of the problem almost always boils down to someone cutting their calories way too soon, consequently forcing their metabolism to slow down to prevent what the body perceives to be imminent starvation.Once you’ve slowed your metabolism down to a point that you cannot lose fat even eating less than 2000 calories per day, you have dug yourself into a hole that you will need to climb back out of to reach a sustainable diet model again and restore a healthy metabolism.While there are exceptions to this, the vast majority of men will be very micronutrient deficient and feel starved all day eating less than 2000 calories per day.[embedded content]Table of ContentsThe Best Way To Stay Lean With EaseBy far, the easiest way to stay lean without trying is by gaining muscle.Muscle rips through calories at rest.This is why many bodybuilders who aren’t trying to gain size can walk around with visible abs year round even while eating McDonalds and other crap every single day.Long term, gaining muscle is what will make each cutting phase far easier, as well as make staying lean with a sustainable daily calorie intake much easier as well.While it does expend some calories, going to the gym, exercising and doing a bunch of cardio is just a small fraction of your daily energy expenditure.What is going to determine your energy expenditure on a day-to-day basis is largely going to be your muscle tissue.The more muscle you have, the faster your metabolism will be.That is why making the most out of your off-season when you aren’t even trying to get lean is critical for your upcoming cutting phases several months away. Priming your metabolism with a well planned off-season is one of the biggest keys when it comes to a successful cut phase.Once it actually comes time to cut, the biggest mistake guys make is cutting their calories too soon.Don’t Cut Calories Too EarlyFar too often guys will cut their calories far too soon, plateau again, and then cut their calories even more.As much as calories in vs calories out gets hammered into your head in the fitness industry, a BMR calculator will not account for metabolic adaptation.Sometimes the issue is that guys have no idea how to count their calories properly and aren’t actually in a deficit.However, this often isn’t the case among guys who aren’t complete newbies to bodybuilding.The issue oftentimes among guys who aren’t completely new to this is actually that metabolic adaptation is preventing further fat loss due to poor diet choices.And by poor diet choices I don’t mean cheating on your diet.I mean dieting too hard too soon.If you cut your calories too quickly, you will eventually end up eating less than 2000 calories per day, still not have achieved the body composition you wanted to, and be wondering what you did wrong, or even throw dangerous fat burners into your protocol to try and milk more fat loss and rip even more muscle off your frame, consequently impairing your metabolism even more.What A Typical Poorly Executed Cutting Phase Will Look LikeThis applies even for those on steroids, as the same mistakes are made by naturals and enhanced individuals who have been convinced that calories in vs. calories out and maintenance calorie calculations are all that matter.They will typically start at a 500 calorie deficit and be eating around 2500-2700 calories (general example applicable to most).Fat loss will be great and all will be smooth sailing.After a few weeks, weight loss will stall and they will assume that they have plateaued and need to cut their calories a bit more.They will then drop their calorie intake another 300 calories and get down to 2200-2400 calories.Fat loss starts again, and all seems to be smooth sailing but it is starting to get very difficult to stick to the diet at this point because cravings are starting to heighten severely, and hunger is at an all time high.Fat loss plateaus after another couple weeks and they drop their calorie intake another 200 calories and get down to 2000-2200 calories per day.Fat loss starts again, but cravings consume the mind all day and hunger is nearly uncontrollable at this point.Energy starts to feel much lower and workout quality is starting to suffer greatly.Another couple weeks passes and they’re much leaner, but they still aren’t where they want to be.They plateau again and then cut their calories to 1800-2000 calories.Fat loss starts again, but at this point they are barely functioning and are still hungry even after eating their biggest meal of the day.Hunger consumes their mind all day, and just getting through a workout is much more difficult.Focus and productivity starts to deteriorate as energy levels are very low, and food is all what matters at this point.They may even cave in and binge eat at this point.After another week or two, weight loss plateaus again, and I get an email asking what to do.As you can imagine, this diet model is not sustainable, and it was very poorly executed.This diet model is what leads to skinny fat physiques and yo-yo dieting.The Common Mistake That Will Ruin Your Cut And Your MetabolismFollowing the typical diet model I outlined above, before you know it you may end up eating less than 2000 calories per day and plateau before achieving the body composition you wanted to.If you cut your calories way too soon, the problem is that you’re forcing your body to adapt and slow down to prevent starving to death.Your body reacts and adapts accordingly based on what you provide it energy-wise.That is the same reason why if you’re bulking up and you increase your calories to 3300 calories per day you will gain weight for a couple weeks or so, but you will eventually plateau.Now when you’re eating 3300 calories a day, your body is staying the same weight, regardless of the fact that you’re in a “calorie surplus” according to BMR calculators and calories in vs. calories out dogma.The reason this happens is because your body adapts and auto-regulates your metabolism to accommodate its new intake of calories.When you’re cutting, the exact same thing applies.If you’re eating 3000 calories per day consistently and then you cut your calories to 2700 to start your cut, you will lose weight.The root of the issue rears its ugly head when you wake up one day and step on the scale and see that your weight loss has stalled.What do most logically do when they see this?They decrease their calories.Expectedly, fat loss starts again and everything seems fine.Then, you wake up in a week or two and plateau again.What do you do?Cut calories again?That’s what most will do.You can see where this goes.Before you know it you’re stalled out at a hardly lean, maybe even skinny fat 12-13% body fat physique eating 1600 calories per day and doing cardio every day for an hour.Remember, muscle mass is the main thing that will determine how much fat you lose without even exercising.The goal is to keep as much muscle on your frame as possible.Depriving yourself of nutrients is the most catabolic thing you can do.However, a calorie deficit is needed to lose fat, so exactly what should you do to avoid this negative metabolic adaptation and unsustainable diet model?What To Do When Weight Loss PlateausIf you’re in a 300 calorie deficit and the scale shows that you plateaued for one day, that does not mean that your body has already downregulated its metabolism and needs another calorie cut to continue losing fat.Your weight may stay the same for three days in a row and then all of a sudden drop a full pound.That doesn’t mean that you suddenly lost 1 pound of fat over a random 24 hour period, but it means that using the scale on a 24 hour basis as a metric of progression does not always reveal everything that is going on behind the scenes in your body.There are tons of factors at play that are temporary that will greatly impact your scale weight on a day-to-day basis.These include but are not limited to fluid retention, electrolyte balance, food sitting in your stomach, a piece of crap literally sitting inside you that you haven’t dropped yet, among countless other things that can influence your weight.Just because 24 hours has passed and the scale hasn’t moved, it doesn’t mean that you’ve stalled.The issue is that most guys will see their weight stay the same for a couple days, or potentially even increase by a bit and then assume that they need to cut their calories again.More often than not, they could have stuck with that calorie allotment for another week and probably milked more fat loss out of that incremental drop in calories.By cutting calories far too soon and far too aggressively you force your body into a state of preservation.Your body doesn’t care about getting shredded, in fact it wants the opposite, and metabolic adaption will slow your weight loss down if you don’t know how to manipulate it.If you cut down to 1800 calories way too quickly, what’s going to happen?You’re going to lose tons of fat at first, but then your body’s going to downregulate far quicker than it would have if you had kept your calorie intake higher.Because of this, you miss out on a significant amount of fat loss that you could have milked out of those smaller incremental drops in calories that you should have done had you not been so aggressive with your deficit.You will also lose more muscle, which will also impair your fat loss potential.After a month or two when you plateau, you will be in a position where you can’t lose any additional fat eating barely anything as is, and you will have nowhere to go as you’ve dug yourself into the deepest hole you could be in during a cut.I know guys that are my weight and height that are eating as much as my girl to get lean.My girl is 90 pounds!There are guys at 200+ pounds trying to get down to 7% body fat plateauing in fat loss at 12% body fat eating as much as a girl.They can’t get any leaner because they’ve cut their calories down to something ridiculous like 1500, and end up doing cardio for an hour per day, on hordes of fat burners, and still can’t get as lean as they want.They dropped from 3000 down to 1500 calories in a matter of weeks as opposed to milking all the fat loss they could have out of each increment.My general approach to cutting and how I advise you do it is to start with a minor deficit.Much like how you would approach a lean bulk (but the opposite).How To Manipulate Your Body’s Metabolic Adaptation So You Never Need To Eat Less Than 2000 Calories Per DayStart with minor deficit of 300 calories.That is enough to start the fat loss process. Milk all the fat loss you can out of it, and then once you plateau for a full week you can then assess what the most intelligent strategy to deploy at that time would be for your goals to continue the fat loss process. Metabolic adaptation doesn’t happen overnight.There’s an adjustment period.But, once your body has adapted, you can be damn sure that you’re probably going to need to restrict more calories or increase energy expenditure to continue burning fat.What I’m trying to hammer home here is that you don’t want to do that too early.Basically, you want to yield the most benefit you can out of each deprivation increment.Once you ensure that your body has actually plateaued, then you cut calories further (or increase your energy expenditure).That next cut shouldn’t be an extra 300 calories either.You can start the fat loss process again just by dropping another 100 calories of carbs per day.You don’t need to cut 300 calories every single increment to start fat loss again.This is what many do though, and this is why they will end up eating less than 2000 calories per day and still be stalling and spin their wheels for weeks eating like a bird.Guys that know how to diet will NEVER tank their calories from 3000 to 1500 in a matter of 6 weeks unless they had an impending deadline that they needed to crash diet for.Once you’ve dug yourself into a hole where your metabolism is so downregulated that you can’t even lose fat eating 1600 calories per day with frequent cardio, you have no other move than reverse diet yourself out of the hole to rev your metabolism back up.You can’t expect your body composition changes to be favorable once you have forced yourself to adapt to what your body perceives to be sudden starvation.Just because a calorie calculator says you are in a huge deficit and you should continue losing fat at X rate, your body does not care.When metabolic adaptation downregulates your “maintenance calories” to much less than that, numbers on paper don’t mean a thing, and your results will show that.Your body is now in a state of extreme stress to hold onto everything for dear life to prevent you from withering away and dying.If you are starting to cut, start with the 300-calorie deficit and go from there.In general (doesn’t apply if you have a short-term deadline you need to crash diet for), I like to start with a 300 calorie deficit per day and not change a thing until I’ve plateaued for a full week.At that point, I either restrict another 100 calories (usually coming from carbohydrates), or increase my cardio session duration by 5 minutes, or add another cardio session in per week with the same current duration, or introduce a fat burner at the lowest effective dose.Those are the options.I either increase my energy expenditure, or I reduce my calorie intake.When I reduce my calorie intake or increase my energy expenditure, it is in a small increment and then I milk all of the fat loss out of that increment until metabolic adaption causes my body to downregulate again.Once I can no longer yield any additional fat loss out of that change for a full week, then I look at the next incremental change after that point.Which would then be another 100 calorie restriction, or increase in cardio duration, or add another cardio session in with no change in duration, or increase my dose of fat burners (if safe), or introduce another fat burner if there is another compound I have not yet deployed that also has a strong efficacy profile.There are so many options available to start the fat loss process again that you should never be in a situation 8 weeks deep into your cut where you’re eating less than 2000 calories per day and plateauing.If 24 hours passes and I don’t lose weight, it’s not the end of the world, and it certainly does not mean I need to drop another several hundred calories.This mistake can ruin months of work as you only have one option once you’ve dug yourself into a hole like this, and that is to rev your metabolism back up with a sustainable amount of calories.I strongly advise that you prime your body during each off-season and gain as much muscle as possible (without exceeding 15% body fat).If you’ve primed your body correctly and gained muscle during the off-season, you should be able to end your subsequent cut phase as lean, or leaner than your previous cut while eating more calories than you did during your previous cut.This is one metric I use to assess whether or not a bulk and cut phase was successful or not.Related

Chris Hemsworth’s Steroid Cycle – What I Think He Took For Thor

There is a lot of speculation around whether or not Chris Hemsworth’s transformation for Thor was natural, or if he did a steroid cycle during his prep for the film in 2009.Chris Hemsworth purportedly gained between 20-25 pounds of muscle in 6 months to prepare for his role of Thor [R].I do not believe it was a natural transformation, and I’m going to outline exactly what I think he took, as well as the dosages he used.[embedded content]Table of ContentsNatty Chris Hemsworth In “Home And Away” (2004-2007)If you go back and look at Chris Hemsworth in “Home and Away,” you can see what his physique looked like naturally.This athletic looking physique with about 15% body fat is pretty typical for a young man with a half decent metabolism.Chris doesn’t look like anything special here, and does not have much muscle on his frame.This is what his physique looked like in 2007 at the tail end of his appearances in Home And Away.[embedded content]Chris claimed that prior to Thor, he had never strictly weight trained with the intention of packing on muscle.Natty Chris Hemsworth In “A Perfect Getaway” (2009)A Perfect Getaway was filmed from March 31st, 2008 – May, 2008 we can see that Chris packed on a little bit of mass for this role.While he isn’t as big as he became for Thor in 2010, we can start to see his genetic shape as he packs on some lean tissue.Chris was likely still natural here, but may have started weight training by this point.Natty Chris Hemsworth In “The Cabin in the Woods” (2011)The Cabin in the Woods is the best glimpse we get into a “before” of Chris before filming Thor as it was filmed from March 9th, 2009 – May 29th, 2009.In this movie we can see exactly what Chris’ physique looked like almost exactly 6 months before filming for Thor began in 2010.Chris looks slightly leaner in this movie than he did in A Perfect Getaway, but does not look like he packed on any additional muscle.At this point, Chris already secured the role as Thor and knew how much muscle he had to pack on over the remaining months in the year, so it is likely that he had already started resistance training in some capacity during the time frame this movie was filmed in.[embedded content]I believe Chris was still natural in The Cabin in the Woods.Gaining 20-25 Pounds Of Muscle In 6 Months For His Role In Thor (2011)After filming for The Cabin in the Woods finished at the end of May in 2009, Chris had about 7 and a half months to pack on as much muscle as possible for Thor.Thor was filmed from January 11th, 2010 – May 6th, 2010, as well as October 10th, 2010 – October 31st, 2010.Chris claims he didn’t lift weights prior to preparing for Thor.Chris didn’t show his physique very much in the movie Red Dawn, which was filmed between September 8th, 2009 – December 11th, 2009, so the physique we see during The Cabin in the Woods serves as our best benchmark for a before and after transformation.Over 6 months following the filming of The Cabin in the Woods, Chris added 20-25 pounds of fat-free mass to his frame, and completely transformed his physique.Even as an untrained natural newbie with amazing genetics, it is nearly impossible to gain 20-25 pounds of muscle in 6 months.With that being said, I do not believe that Chris actually gained 20-25 pounds of pure muscle.It was probably closer to 15 pounds, with an additional 5-10 pounds of temporary water and nitrogen retention, and with a portion of that last 10 pounds also being fat gain.[embedded content]He’s not much leaner in Thor compared to his last role, if at all.Considering that, some might start to consider that this transformation may be possible naturally.It is debateable, but I believe that the nail in the coffin for Chris is when you reference what his physique looks like between his appearances as Thor.He is clearly not capable of sustaining that level of mass year-round.It really isn’t that hard to maintain muscle mass on steroids.Even if you train just a few times a week and eat a clean diet, you should be able to hold onto everything you have with TRT dosages with ease.The only exception to this are bodybuilders with such an unnatural amount of muscle that they need to be on a low dose blast year round to maintain their size, but obviously this does not apply to Chris Hemsworth, myself, or likely you either.Clearly he eats at least moderately clean year round, otherwise he wouldn’t stay as lean as he does.Considering that, he would literally have to stop working out entirely to lose the amount of muscle he does between his Thor appearances to lose that muscle if he stayed on TRT year round.The rate at which he loses the majority of his size between movies is a flagship indicator of steroid cycling.When you compare Chris Hemsworth’s physique in different movies, it is pretty clear that there is a night and day difference in muscle mass in his Thor appearances relative to other roles.Even including roles where he has gotten very lean, like Rush in 2013.From what I can see, Chris Hemsworth’s physique peaked in size for the first Thor movie, and during his Thor prep in 2009 is likely when he used the highest dosed steroid cycle that he has ever used for the entirety of his career.Maintaining Muscle For His Role In “The Avengers” (2012)The Avengers was filmed from April 25th, 2011 – September 4th, 2011.[embedded content]Chris appears to be a bit smaller in this role than he was in the first Thor movie, but clearly put in the work to attempt to replicate that look again for this movie.Losing Muscle For His Role In “Rush” (2013)Rush was filmed early to mid-2012 [R].This was less than a year after The Avengers was filmed.This is first role we can see that Chris clearly dropped a significant amount of his Thor mass for.Chris appears to have 10-15 pounds less fat-free mass in Rush, but actually looks a bit leaner than he did in Thor.[embedded content]Whether he was natural for this role or not is tough to say, as he is still much more muscular than he was in Home And Away.Chris Hemsworth discussed in several interviews how difficult it was for him to drop enough muscle mass for his role as James Hunt in “Rush” [R, R].Can you attribute that to just training less and eating less?Perhaps, yes.However, the fact that Chris stated how difficult it was to lose muscle mass for the role is also a red flag that implies that he was unnatural when he filmed this movie as well.If you go from being enhanced to natural, the muscle will fall off your body with ease during calorie restriction.You would also not stay as lean as you were when you were enhanced.The fact that Chris Hemsworth’s physique appeared to have lost muscle and a bit of extra fat, and the difficulty he stated he had with losing that muscle implies that he was still on a steroid cycle during his preparation for this role.The dosage was probably much lower though, or he could have had residual amounts of androgens still clearing his system from his previous showing as Thor in The Avengers.It’s hard to lose muscle on steroids, even during calorie restriction.It is not hard at all to lose muscle when you are natural and deprive yourself of calories.Gaining Muscle Back For His Role In “Thor: The Dark World” (2013)Thor: The Dark World was filmed from September 10th, 2012 – December 14th, 2012.[embedded content]Within just a few months of filming Rush, Chris packed on a decent amount of size for the second Thor movie again.Losing Muscle For His Role In “Blackhat” (2015)Blackhat was filmed in May, 2013.Chris lost the mass he had in the second Thor movie within a few months to play this role, and I believe he likely accomplished that just by going off cycle.[embedded content]Losing Muscle For His Role In “In The Heart Of The Sea” (2015)In The Heart Of The Sea was filmed in September, 2013.This was the most shocking transformation to the public, as a viral picture taken by Chris started circulating which showed him looking emaciated for his role in the movie.I believe the hype around this transformation was a bit exaggerated, as he clearly still has a fair bit of muscle on his frame in the after picture.He’s still more muscular and leaner than he was in Home And Away, but the way he’s posing and the lighting is unflattering on purpose to make the transformation look as dramatic as possible.With that being said, he clearly lost size for Blackhat, and took the weight loss to another level for a short stint when filming In The Heart Of The Sea a few months later in September of the same year.Gaining Muscle Back For His Role In “Avengers: Age of Ultron” (2015)Filming for Avengers: Age Of Ultron occurred between February 11th, 2014 – August 6th, 2014.[embedded content]Chris went from looking like an emaciated version of himself to looking muscle bound for Thor again in only 4-5 months.Is he as big as he was in 2009 when he prepared to film the first Thor movie?No, I don’t think so, but he’s definitely not far off.The lighting is poor in this clip, so it is hard to say for certain, but he obviously packed on the majority of the size again in a short time span. With the muscle memory Chris developed from his previous bulking phases and the state of calorie deprivation he put his body in, the rebound back to a muscle bound Thor was probably fairly easy for him during those 4-5 months.What he used to prepare for the first Thor movie, he likely used again to prepare for this role at the tail end of 2013 before filming started in 2014.Regardless of how you much you want to may want to believe a transformation like this is possible naturally, 99.9% of humans can’t stay the same level of body fat and gain 20 pounds, lose 20 pounds, gain 20 pounds, lose 20 pounds of lean tissue back and forth like this.The amount Chris fluctuates between roles and between his showings as Thor is very indicative of exogenous hormone use in my opinion.Losing Muscle For His Role In “Ghostbusters” (2016)After the 2015 Avengers movie, Chris downsized again and we can see this in his 2016 roles that were filmed in 2015, as well as in his interviews in 2016.[embedded content]Gaining Muscle Back For His Role In “Thor: Ragnarok” (2017)Filming for Thor: Ragnarok occurred July 4th, 2016 – October 28th, 2016 and in July, 2017.This is probably the leanest Chris has gotten for any appearance as Thor, although I believe he was still a bit bigger in the first Thor movie.He’s leaner and dryer than he was in the first Thor movie, but with what appears to be 5-10 pounds less overall mass.With that being said, this is yet another example of Chris transforming his body in a short time span to play Thor.[embedded content]As Chris gets deeper into his 30’s, the need for exogenous anabolic support becomes even more necessary to support these quick transformations, and is just another red flag that his preparation for his appearances as Thor are likely completed with hormonal assistance.Chris Hemsworth’s Steroid CycleWhich Steroids I Think He UsedBased on the fact that Chris’ biggest physique was in the first Thor movie, as well as factoring in that it was the first time Chris gained that size (it is harder to gain muscle the first time around due to muscle memory), I’m going to elaborate on what I believe he took to prepare for that movie in particular.Chris’ Hemsworth trainer said that he gained 20 to 25 pounds of muscle in 6 months.That number could be inflated, and I think that it is more likely that Chris gained 20 to 25 pounds of fat-free mass, not dry tissue.That would include temporary water retention, nitrogen and blood volume.With that being said, the amount of muscle he gained in the given time frame was still very unnatural. My best guess is that Hemsworth just took Testosterone to prepare for his first appearance as Thor.It has the best safety profile and clinical efficacy out of any human approved steroid, and it is just a no brainer go to for a first steroid cycle.In addition to that, he’s sporting a very watery and full look in Thor.He looked dryer in both Rush and Thor: Ragnarok than he did in the first Thor movie.He doesn’t have a crazy androgenic dryness to his physique either.That full look is advantageous for appearing as big as possible for Thor though, despite having a bit more intracellular water than would be ideal from a bodybuilding perspective.With the goal being as much fullness and size as possible while maintaining a reasonably lean level of body fat, it is very likely that Testosterone was the compound of choice for this transformation.Looking as inflated as possible was the goal, and I believe he accomplished that.I doubt he stacked anything on top of that because it wouldn’t have been necessary to achieve these results.A supraphysiological dose of Testosterone was more than sufficient.To determine what dose of Testosterone Hemsworth used for his transformation, we can extrapolate data from clinical studies conducted on healthy young men to get a better idea of what he likely took to achieve the results he did in the time frame given.Testosterone Dose-Response In Healthy Young MenThe Study ParametersThis study evaluated the results of weekly administrations of Testosterone at dosages of 25 mg, 50 mg, 125 mg, 300 mg, and 600 mg for 20 weeks in healthy young men [R].Keep in mind when you interpret these results that fat-free mass also accounts for water, it is not just pure muscle tissue.As you would expect, the higher the Testosterone dose used, the more aromatization occurs.The more aromatization there is occurring in the body, the more water retention will also occur, which is going to play a role here too, as it did in Chris Hemsworth’s transformation.[embedded content]MethodologyNutritional intake was controlledThe exercise regimen was controlledThe dose was controlledUsed pharmaceutical-grade testosteroneEnergy and protein intakes were standardized at 16.33 calories per pound per day, and 0.544 grams per pound per day.Participants were instructed to not partake in strength training or moderate-to-heavy endurance exercise during the study.The only thing that differed between the participants was the dosage of Testosterone administered.ResultsBy looking at the body composition analysis in this study we can see that there was an expected dose-dependent response in muscle accrual across all groups.25 mg Testosterone per week caused a drop in muscle mass due to the fact that endogenous androgen production was suppressed in the young men due to the presence of exogenous androgens, and the exogenous androgen dosage was lower than what would normally be endogenously produced naturally.With 50 mg Testosterone per week, they’re about breaking even here.125 mg Testosterone is where things start to get very supraphysiological in terms of dose-response and the literal androgen load in the body significantly exceeding what a healthy young man would produce naturally.On average, a healthy young man produces between 3 to 10 milligrams of Testosterone per day naturally.[embedded content]In the 300 mg Testosterone treated group, fat-free mass increased by 5.2 kilograms.In the 600 mg Testosterone treated group, fat-free mass increased by 7.9 kilograms.7.9 kilograms is just shy of 17.5 pounds.That means that over the span of about 5 months, healthy young men were able to gain 17.5 pounds of fat-free mass using 600 mg of Testosterone with a subpar protein intake and without even doing any weight training.Those 2 factors will significantly impair potential muscle accrual, and we can expect that someone eating an optimized diet for bodybuilding and training hard with progressive overload could expect fat-free mass gains likely in the 20-25+ pound range.This is where we can extrapolate the data and draw it back to exactly what I believe Chris used, and the duration of his use.What Dosages I Think Chris Hemsworth Used To Prepare For ThorBased on the dose-response study I outlined above, we can see that healthy young men gained upwards of 17.5 pounds of fat-free mass over a 5 month time span without even adhering to a strict resistance training plan or eating an optimal amount of protein for hypertrophy.Relating this back to Chris Hemsworth’s body transformation, we already know he gained 20-25 pounds of fat-free mass over the course of 6 months.He was eating a strict diet tailored for hypertrophy, as well as following a very intense bodybuilding regimen (or at least we can assume it was intense).Factoring in Chris’ strict adherence to a tailored diet and training protocol, I would assume that he likely took between 400 to 600 mg of Testosterone per week for the last 6 months in 2009 leading up to filming Thor in 2010.Chris Hemsworth’s physique was at his biggest in the first Thor movie, so that was likely the highest dosed steroid cycle he has ever used in his acting career to prepare for a role.It was also the first time he had ever packed on that size, which further solidifies that he likely took the highest dose of steroids he has used over his entire career to prepare for this first appearance as Thor.It is much easier to gain back lost muscle via muscle memory and previously accrued myonuclei than it is to gain fresh new muscle for the first time.Related

Does Trenbolone Cause Alzheimer’s Disease? | What The Data Shows

After clinical data started circulating in the bodybuilding community showing that Trenbolone administration caused beta amyloid plaque accumulation in rat brains, more and more attention has been given to the potential neurodegenerative effects it may have in humans, and how Trenbolone may cause the progression of Alzheimer’s disease.Without even delving into the clinical data, most will agree that Trenbolone blatantly exhibits some worrisome effects on cognitive health.If you’ve used it, I’m sure you can attest to the fact that no other steroid is on par when it comes to the effects it seems to have on the mind.The fact is, it is one of the most volatile steroids for cognitive health and mental state.Some guys can’t even use it because it gives them such bad mental side effects.[embedded content]Table of ContentsThe Effect Trenbolone Has On Your MindTrenbolone is jokingly (but also fairly accurately) called the “relationship destroyer” drug.Aggression and volatility of your mood can occur with any androgen, and the degree to which this happens is largely dependent on the androgenicity of the steroid in question.If you have an aggressive personality, increasing your body’s androgen load is going to exacerbate that.Trenbolone in particular though seems to have a bit of a different effect that is not found with any other compound.Some guys feel great, but many feel extremely anxious, paranoid, have volatile mood swings, and are much more easily agitated when compared to how they feel using other anabolic-androgenic steroids.I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the rats that had Trenbolone administered to them in the clinical studies experienced significant neurodegeneration.The Trenbolone Dosage Protocol In Humans Via Negma Laboratories (Parabolan)The dose is the poison when it comes to steroids, and Trenbolone is no different.The first thing to take into consideration when it comes to the neurodegenerative impact Trenbolone has on humans is the dosage deployed for bodybuilding purposes.Trenbolone abuse is rampant in the fitness industry nowadays, and teenagers on their first steroid cycle are using Trenbolone dosages higher than what farmers use to beef up cattle.[embedded content]Trenbolone has no place in a first cycle, nor does it have a place in any cycle except for a couple token scenarios in my opinion.Pharmaceutical grade Trenbolone used to be produced for human use by Negma Laboratories under the brand name Parabolan, but there were no published human trials.It was pulled from the market in 1997 and is no longer approved for human use.The Trenbolone dosage used in a clinical setting for humans was purportedly three 76 mg Parabolan ampules per month.This equates to approximately 50 mg of active hormone per ampule after cleaving off the ester.This had a front load period of three Parabolan ampules over the first 15 days, followed by a maintenance phase of one Parabolan ampule every 10 days thereafter.114 mg Trenbolone Hexahydrobenzylcarbonate (75 mg active hormone) per week for the first two weeks76 mg Trenbolone Hexahydrobenzylcarbonate (50 mg active hormone) per 10 days thereafterIFBB Pro bodybuilders in the 90’s had success with Trenbolone following similar dosage protocols.Does that mean that those dosages were safe?No, not at all.But, there is a dose dependent increase in risk with this compound, and the dosages unnecessarily being used nowadays are insane to say the least.Based on the clinical data, we can see a dose dependent accumulation of beta amyloid plaque in the brains of the rodents administered Trenbolone, which more than likely has significant crossover into humans.Trenbolone Contributes To NeurodegenerationThe study that drew the most attention to Trenbolone’s effect on neurodegeneration is titled: “17β-trenbolone, an anabolic-androgenic steroid as well as an environmental hormone, contributes to neurodegeneration [R].”This part of the study is the most notable: “Trenbolone accumulated in adult rat brain, especially in the hippocampus and in the fetus brain, it altered amyloid-beta-42 accumulation. Trenbolone induced apoptosis of primary hippocampus neurons in vitro and resisted neuroprotective function of testosterone.”Apoptosis is cell death.Trenbolone not only caused cell death of neurons in the brain, but it caused amyloid-beta-42 to accumulate in a dose dependent manner.Trenbolone Causes Beta Amyloid Plaque AccumulationThe male rats given Trenbolone injections had amyloid-beta-42 (also referred to as beta amyloid) accumulate in their brains.Alzheimer’s disease is believed to be caused by the accumulation of the beta amyloid peptide.While there has been no human trial to assess if this occurs in humans, and there probably is never going to be, I think it is best to assume the worst when we see data like this.As I already touched on, I do not think it is a coincidence that guys get very strange mental side effects from Tren that they don’t get with other compounds.Beta amyloid plaque build up doesn’t just occur with Trenbolone use obviously, and our body does have internal mechanisms in place to clean the brain of it each day.Healthy individuals clear beta amyloid out of the brain during deep sleep via glymphatic drainage.Basically, beta amyloid builds up and then the brain cleans it up during deep sleep.If sleep quality and/or duration is impaired, expectedly, drainage via the glymphatic system is impaired too, and beta amyloid plaque then starts to accumulate over time, which can eventually cause Alzheimer’s disease and a myriad of other neurodegenerative outcomes.This is why so many neurodegenerative diseases have been linked to poor sleep quality.If you don’t have enough “brain cleaning” occurring each night because of poor sleep, you will eventually pay the toll in some way with impaired cognitive function.While this is a rodent model, if you’re injecting something that has shown to increase the literal compound in your brain proven to be the root of Alzheimer’s disease in a dose dependent manner, you can surmise that this probably isn’t the best compound to be using on a consistent basis.Should You Ever Use Trenbolone Based On The Neurotoxicity Data?Remember, the dose is the poison with any drug.While Trenbolone isn’t safe and will be more neurotoxic and cardiotoxic the higher the dosage deployed, you can’t argue with the fact that it is an amazing drug for body composition.I believe Trenbolone has a place in a competitive bodybuilder’s toolbox pre-contest.Trenbolone has shown to be more protein sparing than other steroids, and is why it shines so much in a calorie deficit during a contest prep phase [R].When it comes to protein accretion though (muscle building), Trenbolone does not outperform other compounds that have significant amounts of human-based safety, efficacy and tolerability data for us to reference.There are other hormones just as effective at building lean muscle mass, without as much potential risk associated with screwing up your brain.Considering this, the only time short-term use of Trenbolone makes sense is during the last couple months of a contest prep.There are a lot of guys using Trenbolone during every single cycle, which is overkill.Although purely anecdotal, I’ve personally seen guys who cruise on Tren year round progressively act more and more “off” each time I saw them.Its almost like you can just tell there is a screw loose that wasn’t loose before with guys who abuse Tren.Using Trenbolone short-term pre-contest is a calculated risk, and I would advise limiting its use, or avoiding it entirely if you can.The Vicious Circle Of Deep Sleep, Beta Amyloid Plaque And Alzheimer’s ProgressionDr. Matthew Walker is a scientist and professor of neuroscience and psychology at the University of California.His research focuses on the impact of sleep on human health and disease.In the following clip he describes the role that sleep plays in modulating the accumulation of amyloid-beta accumulation in the brain.I highly recommend that you watch the entire thing, or read through the transcription I wrote out below, as it elucidates exactly how sleep impacts cognitive health and neurodegenerative outcomes, and also provides insight into exactly how Trenbolone abuse will likely encourage the progression of Alzheimer’s disease and neurodegeneration.At the end of the article I tie together Matthew Walker’s points outlined in the clip and relate it back to how it applies to Trenbolone use, as well as how to track metrics that will help you assess your cognitive health and sleep quality.[embedded content]“Of those electrical deep brain waves of deep sleep.It seems as though they come from all over the brain.But the principal epicenter that generates your deep sleep sits right there in the middle part of the prefrontal cortex.It is exactly the same part of the brain that accumulates toxic beta amyloid protein.Then, we’ve done studies, and other people have done studies before us, that have demonstrated as we age, our sleep gets worse.But not just any type of sleep, especially that deep quality of sleep that we know and we spoke about is critical for saving, learning, and retaining new memories.All of these jigsaw pieces started to get put together.In my head, I thought we need to do some studies.Is it possible that the amount of amyloid that you have in the brain in this sleep-generating center, it should directly predict the deficit in the amount of deep sleep that you get?If it predicts the deficit in the amount of deep sleep, it should predict the deficit in your ability to hold on and retain new memories, which is a hallmark cognitive feature of Alzheimer’s disease: difficulty learning, difficulty retaining.We did the study, and that’s exactly what we found: the more beta amyloid that builds up in this central frontal part of the brain, the less the deep sleep that you have; the less amyloid-related deep sleep that you had, the more forgetful you were the next day, rather than the more that you remembered.This was the first part of the Alzheimer’s sleep equation, which is that Alzheimer’s disease attacks the deep sleep-generating regions, and you have a diminution of deep sleep, which, in turn, blunts your learning and memory abilities, and you become more forgetful.A far more important discovery was made by another group, far more important than the one we made, which was essentially the reverse direction.Which was to say, rather than amyloid sort of decreasing sleep, could sleep actually decrease the amount of amyloid that you get.This was a discovery that was made in rats back in 2009.I believe it was the first evidence that was published in science.This is a colleague, Dr. Neta Garden, who is out on the East Coast at University of Rochester.She made two wonderful discoveries.The first, was that we’ve known for a long time the body has a waste sewage system called the lymphatic system.But the brain doesn’t have its own lymphatic system: the lymphatic system does not penetrate the brain.Where does all of the garbage, the metabolic garbage, go that your brain cells produce?Where’s the sewage system for the brain?She discovered it.It’s actually made up of a set of cells called glial cells, which are the supporting brain cells.So, she called it the “glymphatic system” rather than the lymphatic system.Your brain does have a sewage system: this glymphatic system.That’s the discovery that she made.Remarkable!Then, and I’m not quite sure what motivated her to do this, she started to measure how efficient that lymphatic waste system was.When the rats were awake and when the rats were asleep?What she found was that it’s during deep sleep, that these brain cells actually shrink by almost 60%.When we sleep, blows my mind, it’s almost like all of the buildings in New York all of a sudden shrink, and it leaves these much greater large areas for the cleaning crews to come in and clean up all of the metabolic detritus of the city’s activity during the day.That’s exactly what happens during sleep.The cleaning solution is what we call cerebrospinal fluid.Through a pulsatile mechanism during sleep, you get a 10 to 20% increase in the bathing of cerebrospinal fluid through the brain, which washes away all of the metabolic byproducts that have been building up.One of those metabolic byproducts is beta amyloid.In fact, if you deprive those rats of that deep sleep, you immediately get an increase in toxic beta amyloid.Now, we’ve linked these terms, right?It’s a long story.But if you’re not getting enough deep sleep at night, you’re not giving yourself the chance for the kind of good “night-and-sleep clean process” to remove the beta amyloid, so more beta amyloid builds up.Where does it build up?Tragically, in the very same regions of the brain that generate the deep sleep that you need to clear out the toxic amyloid.So, you start getting less deep sleep, so you get more toxic protein; more toxic protein, less deep sleep, less deep sleep.It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy.It’s a nonlinear exponential curve.If you look at how amyloid builds up in the brain, and if you look at the trajectory of Alzheimer’s disease, it is a nonlinear exponential curve.It fits exactly what the sleep-dependent model of amyloid-clearance would predict, if you’re not getting sufficient sleep.That’s the reason why now insufficient sleep seems to be one of the most significant lifestyle factors determining that.Now, you could say, by the way, those studies were in rats, and you deprive them of sleep for one night, what about humans, like, surely?Well, the study is now being done.Great study done out of “Wash U” by a team of scientists, led by David Holtzman.They took a group of humans and they did this very clever method where they deprive them of deep sleep, but they didn’t deprive them of sleep.You think that sounds paradoxical.I can play you these auditory tones.Now, this is not like the memory reactivation word that you play a tone and then you leave the brain alone for a while.Here, I’m just going to keep playing tones to your brain, really sort of annoying tones.I can play them at a level that doesn’t wake you up, but it lifts you out of deep sleep and keeps you in shallow sleep.What’s delightful about this method is that I can selectively excise one type of sleep, deep sleep, but I don’t wake you up.There’s no stress of awakening.You are asleep for the same amount of time, but the quality of sleep is decreased.Can street noise do that?We don’t know.Although, I will come back to that when we speak about, hopefully sleep, appetite regulation, sleep glucose regulation, and sleep in low socio-economic.I think it’s possible there’s other factors that link poor sleep in low SES socioeconomic backgrounds.Is noise pollution one of them?I actually think it is.Untested, as yet.But what they did with these human participants, they selectively removed deep sleep while keeping them asleep.Total sleep time has not changed.Then, in the morning, they woke them up, they rolled them over, and they did a spinal cord puncture, lumbar puncture, and they measured the cerebral spinal fluid that was percolating within the spinal cord which also goes around the brain.You can measure the amount of beta amyloid, which is a reflection of perhaps how much amyloid is there within the brain.After one night of essentially a loss of deep sleep, you saw an immediate rise in the amount of beta amyloid.It is a causal manipulation, that insufficient sleep in rodents and in humans, will lead to a rise in beta amyloid.I think it was like 25 to 30%.It was.It was.Yeah.”Trensomnia And How Trenbolone Can Potentially Cause Alzheimer’s DiseaseAs Matthew outlined in the clip above, the area of the brain that beta amyloid plaque builds up in is the same area of the brain responsible for getting into the stage of deep sleep required for cleaning beta amyloid out of your brain.What I found most interesting about this is the fact that in humans, one of the main side effects of Tren most commonly reported that is unique to that compound is something called “Trensomnia.”Trensomnia is the insomnia and poor quality sleep that many get when using Trenbolone.Trenbolone is notorious for ruining sleep quality, and that is just one of the attributes of Trenbolone that make it unique from other steroids.I think that in itself makes it pretty clear what mechanism is likely occurring with Trenbolone use not just in rodents, but in humans as well.Trenbolone use inhibits deep sleep severely, which in turn results in impaired beta amyloid clean up via the glymphatic system, consequently increasing the amount of beta amyloid plaque accumulation in the brain, which ultimately results in neurodegeneration.The more beta amyloid that builds up, the worse the quality of sleep becomes, and the worse the quality of sleep becomes, the more beta amyloid plaque will accumulate.This is the vicious circle Trenbolone can have on the brain, at least in theory.Is Trenbolone going to cause Alzheimer’s disease?I don’t know.But it seems pretty damn convincing that Trenbolone abuse will at least result in some level of neurodegeneration based on this correlation here, as well as what we see all the time anecdotally in humans who abuse this compound.If you’ve used Trenbolone before, you can likely personally attest to how significant of an impact it has on your sleep quality.Imagine what Trenbolone is doing to the brains of men using it year round.Are you ever actually getting enough deep sleep to clean up beta amyloid accumulated in the brain when you’re on Trenbolone?If you’re abusing Trenbolone you are probably more likely to get cardiovascular disease before you get full blown Alzheimer’s, but that does not mean that you should abuse it based on the fact that neurodegeneration is a slow and long-term process.How To Track Your Sleep QualityA very interesting experiment would be to assess Oura ring metrics before and during Trenbolone use.I use an Oura ring every single night to track my sleep metrics. The Oura ring will give you metrics as accurate as you’re going to get without literally going in and getting an elaborate and expensive sleep study done with medical-grade equipment.The ring will estimate with a fairly high level of accuracy how much sleep you’re getting per night, your REM sleep, deep sleep, resting heart rate, heart rate variability, body temperature, among several other useful metrics.If you’re an anabolic steroid user and you have established average baseline metrics of your sleep quality with the Oura ring and then you introduce Trenbolone into your protocol and suddenly your metrics show that your deep sleep has been severely impaired, I believe that would be more than convincing for me to make an assertion that Trenbolone will dramatically increase your chance of getting Alzheimer’s disease.Related