[h=1]Anabolic Q&A - On Orals & Test Blends[/h]By William Llewellyn
Are Orals Necessary?
I know you have regularly warned of the higher health risks of orals … on the liver and cholesterol. These drugs are very popular, and it makes me wonder: Do you think they are worth the greater risks for some people? I guess what I am asking is, can you get the same results without ever using an oral?
You raise a good question. I can’t say I can answer it with certainty, and the answer may ultimately be an individual one. I do have my opinions, however. First, I would remind us that all drugs of this class (anabolic-androgenic steroids; AAS) primarily work through the same mechanism. They activate the cellular androgen receptor, imparting a message to increase protein synthesis. There are some side mechanisms, of course, which are absent or stronger in some steroids versus others. But these are not as critical to the end effect, nor exclusive to orals.
If you eliminated all oral AAS (even injectable versions of oral drugs like stanozolol), you would be left with the following basic steroids: testosterone, nandrolone, methenolone, drostanolone, trenbolone and boldenone. In that collection, there is a mix of steroids with different basic properties … testosterone is highly androgenic and estrogenic, and obviously known as the universal mass builder. Nandrolone and boldenone are less estrogenic; some of your basic “lean mass-building” anabolics. You have methenolone and drostanolone on the dry side (no estrogen) as well, for cutting and hardening. And of course there is trenbolone, quite a potent injectable viewed by many as versatile for mass, strength and hardening.
You can accomplish a lot with only these injectable AAS. Can you get to the same place? I’d think so, but that is really hard to say for sure. For many, orals are a convenient way to ramp-up the potency of a stack without jamming themselves with more (an uncomfortable level) of injections. They allow a level of use that would otherwise be impractical. Perhaps some may also make a case that they just can’t personally achieve the same results as when they incorporate X, Y or Z cycles. That said, I think the opposite holds true for the majority of users. If you made a conscious decision to simply avoid orals, you’d probably never be worse off for it physique-wise, and your health markers would undoubtedly thank you for it.
I used to just see Sustanon once in a while. Now, there are many different blends or “pre-stacked” testosterone products around my area. They usually sell for $25 to $50 more than regular enanthate. What do you think of these? Are they worth the extra money, or should I stick with the basics?
In my opinion, these products are not worth spending any extra money on. Let me explain why I feel that way. Fundamentally, all esters of testosterone release the same active drug: testosterone. Just the release pattern is different with one ester to the next. Take Sustanon. Its 4-ester blend provides a steadier and longer release of testosterone compared to enanthate. In a clinical setting, it can allow a patient to receive injections less frequently, increasing comfort and compliance. Most “pre-stacked” products are similar compositions; mixes of slow, medium and long-acting esters to keep blood levels steadier for longer.
Drugs like Sustanon may be good if you are using testosterone for hormone replacement therapy (HRT), but I suspect you are not. If you are injecting once or more per week anyway, any benefit to Sustanon becomes difficult to see. A frequent injection schedule with enanthate will keep blood levels relatively stable, and there will be little chance for falloff between injections. With a pre-stacked product like this, you are paying for a benefit that you are never going to use; the “extended warranty plan” of anabolic steroids. And Sustanon aside, almost all of these products are made by underground labs. You are almost assured it is not a pharmaceutical product. If it were me, I’d first consider the legitimacy (safety) of the product, and then the cost per milligram of testosterone.
Are Orals Necessary?
I know you have regularly warned of the higher health risks of orals … on the liver and cholesterol. These drugs are very popular, and it makes me wonder: Do you think they are worth the greater risks for some people? I guess what I am asking is, can you get the same results without ever using an oral?
You raise a good question. I can’t say I can answer it with certainty, and the answer may ultimately be an individual one. I do have my opinions, however. First, I would remind us that all drugs of this class (anabolic-androgenic steroids; AAS) primarily work through the same mechanism. They activate the cellular androgen receptor, imparting a message to increase protein synthesis. There are some side mechanisms, of course, which are absent or stronger in some steroids versus others. But these are not as critical to the end effect, nor exclusive to orals.
If you eliminated all oral AAS (even injectable versions of oral drugs like stanozolol), you would be left with the following basic steroids: testosterone, nandrolone, methenolone, drostanolone, trenbolone and boldenone. In that collection, there is a mix of steroids with different basic properties … testosterone is highly androgenic and estrogenic, and obviously known as the universal mass builder. Nandrolone and boldenone are less estrogenic; some of your basic “lean mass-building” anabolics. You have methenolone and drostanolone on the dry side (no estrogen) as well, for cutting and hardening. And of course there is trenbolone, quite a potent injectable viewed by many as versatile for mass, strength and hardening.
You can accomplish a lot with only these injectable AAS. Can you get to the same place? I’d think so, but that is really hard to say for sure. For many, orals are a convenient way to ramp-up the potency of a stack without jamming themselves with more (an uncomfortable level) of injections. They allow a level of use that would otherwise be impractical. Perhaps some may also make a case that they just can’t personally achieve the same results as when they incorporate X, Y or Z cycles. That said, I think the opposite holds true for the majority of users. If you made a conscious decision to simply avoid orals, you’d probably never be worse off for it physique-wise, and your health markers would undoubtedly thank you for it.
Testosterone BlendsI used to just see Sustanon once in a while. Now, there are many different blends or “pre-stacked” testosterone products around my area. They usually sell for $25 to $50 more than regular enanthate. What do you think of these? Are they worth the extra money, or should I stick with the basics?
In my opinion, these products are not worth spending any extra money on. Let me explain why I feel that way. Fundamentally, all esters of testosterone release the same active drug: testosterone. Just the release pattern is different with one ester to the next. Take Sustanon. Its 4-ester blend provides a steadier and longer release of testosterone compared to enanthate. In a clinical setting, it can allow a patient to receive injections less frequently, increasing comfort and compliance. Most “pre-stacked” products are similar compositions; mixes of slow, medium and long-acting esters to keep blood levels steadier for longer.
Drugs like Sustanon may be good if you are using testosterone for hormone replacement therapy (HRT), but I suspect you are not. If you are injecting once or more per week anyway, any benefit to Sustanon becomes difficult to see. A frequent injection schedule with enanthate will keep blood levels relatively stable, and there will be little chance for falloff between injections. With a pre-stacked product like this, you are paying for a benefit that you are never going to use; the “extended warranty plan” of anabolic steroids. And Sustanon aside, almost all of these products are made by underground labs. You are almost assured it is not a pharmaceutical product. If it were me, I’d first consider the legitimacy (safety) of the product, and then the cost per milligram of testosterone.
