Evaluating Safer Use Models

[BigBaldBeardGuy]

I hadn't seen this discussed much in the archives so I figured I'd throw it out there for opinions.

The main difference that I can tell seems to be in the use of anti estrogens where:

1) AIs are traditionally used on an as needed basis.

2) Safer use models avoid AIs by using minimal test doses and ramping up the anabolics, usually from DHTs.

There are claims of other differences but I feel those are mostly strawmans.

The purpose of the safer use model is apparently to provide a safer overall drug with the caveat that you're probably not going to grow as fast.

An example safer model cycle might be something like. Low dosing the lot:

1) As much test as the individual can handle without an AI. Let's say 300mg.
2) Additional DHT to bring up anabolic load.
3) Maybe nandrolone for joint support
4) GH & Slin
5) ARBs for various benefits
6) Clen or Tren for the anti catabolic effects
7) Various insulin sensitivity promoters

I think the additional stuff is mostly just good practice if you need it, so my question to you Promuscle centers around the main difference which seems to be in AI usage.

If safety is the number one concern (but you're still looking to pump it a little) is it better to use an AI or stack a bunch of primo or masteron to bring up total anabolics?

Pretty sure no one is gonna read past the first sentence so boobies boobies boobies

I think you got most of it right.

The DHT isn’t included to replace the AI though. It’s included to simply increase the anabolics.

Read this in a cunty Australian accent. You start with test and titrate up to a level where you can run the most amount without any sides. Your estrogen is managed on this level without an AI. That’s just an extra drug that you don’t really need.

Then as you said:
1) As much test as the individual can handle without an AI. Let's say 300mg.
2) Additional DHT to bring up anabolic load.
3) Maybe nandrolone for joint support
4) GH & Slin
5) ARBs for various benefits
6) minimal amount of Clen or Tren (as needed) for the anti catabolic effects
7) Various insulin sensitivity promoters
And
8) I think he recommends a PPAR receptor agonist like cardarine (then again, he promotes telmisartan as a wonder drug that fills this role too)

The idea is that instead of blasting high levels of test and another anabolic and adding orals to the point that you then need to cruise in order to give your body a break and bloodwork to recover back to normal, you take advantage of the other pathways using moderate dosages and since nothing skews bloodwork you essentially stay on that for a year.

He defines a moderate dose as 2x clinically prescribed dose.

It sounds reasonable in theory, but who knows. It’s Victor Blacks way of making money. It’s his hook to separate himself from the other 1,000 gear coaches.

Like him or hate him, I still think that little Ewok Broderick Chavez is even more insufferable.

 

[IFBBProDomCardone]

the whole idea of "safer cycles" is worth shit - no one will convince me that it's better to use a ton of dht derivatives to avoid IA which, in fact, even their opponents can't explain what they do so badly that dht derivatives don't do

I'm sorry, but I prefer to use a large dose of a bioidentical hormone such as the test and use the necessary dose of IA than to use 2g of dht derivatives lol

Wish I can like this 10000 times...lol...could not agree more...and the results of these weird cycles, speak for themselves.

 

[Zamun]

You just need to normalize with actually physiological doses (and no 200mg/week isn't physiological). Hormone level biochemistry is shockingly similar between individuals.

Ok that is all the time I have for PM this week. I hope all the cool people on here are doing well!

Not sure how 10mg a day of test will make me less responsive to primo…. But thanks?

 

[Reno911]

I ONLY run Black models. There is NO other way.

 

[aHarness]

So I think the basic idea is that DHT derivates allow the user to run their estrogen higher and their opinion is that higher estrogen is both cardioprotective and hypertrophic.

People don’t understand that the benefits of estrogen aren’t linear. You don’t just want it as high as possible.

 

[aHarness]

Even though I dislike VB I have given him credit for spawning a whole slew of "coaches" who ripped off his ideas with no attribution. Jewett did credit VB because from what I've seen ALL his PED advice came from VB. Most don't manage to create any ideas of their own. No new angles of how to look at things. Of course it's hard to create something truly new as everything has been done or thought about before but I think some manage to give some ideas a personal touch and when it happens it's great.

I mean, that’s just how the game of telephone works in this industry. If someone learned these “methods” from JJ, they aren’t gonna say “oh also, Victor black came up with this”

 

[aHarness]

Additional DHT to bring up anabolic load.

How is this any more healthy though than increasing test and using an AI?

Not claiming you believe this, just an open ended question

 

[Oldwhitedude]

Some good discussion lads.

Just one thing which surprises me about some of the replies...

VBs propaganda machine has worked if he has convinced you into thinking he invented this.

These concepts have been around long before he has been vocal about them and there was no need for him to even be mentioned here.

 

[Oldwhitedude]

You can easily make AAS use relatively "safe" and get all the results most non-competitors would want. Example: Normalize/resensitize the body with 10mg/day test for longish periods. Dial in diet and training. Double that dose until results stabilize, increase it again until results stabilize, increase it again until results stabilize. Return to 10mg/day for longish periods. Be on point with diet and training consistently. Avoid anti-E drugs. Do bloodwork. Get heartscans and echo. Don't mess with testosterone analogues. Stay away from fat burners. Don't do "static" moderate dose cycles without normalization (ie 300mg/week year round, etc).

You can also compete at the "local" level with good results on a program like this if you have decent genetics.

Of course this doesn't apply to real competitive bodybuilding. But for what most people actually seem to want, it's more than enough, they are usually being limited by training/diet if it isn't.

This is a good counter point because inheritant in the safer use model is that you're basically on all year, whereas cruising on 10mg is also another way to really help the body normalize itself if needed.

 

[VaginaBoob89]

1) As much test as the individual can handle without an AI. Let's say 300mg.

This is what blows my mind... I feel like I can run about 1g of test without needing any AI. Running 1g test and 800mg mast e and I felt some low estro symptoms. I have no idea how these guys are running these 300mg test, 1g+ primo or mast, and 300mg npp cycles and still have any sex drive. I feel like the "safest use" model would just be test+gh+slin for me at least and not dick around with special weird numbers on DHTs and 19-nors.

 

[Golden]

The hit on blood lipids with the likes of primo and mast is always what seems to be ignored by the safer model preachers. Arguably the alteration of lipids is certainly no safer in the long term

 

[Blueballs]

I hadn't seen this discussed much in the archives so I figured I'd throw it out there for opinions.

The main difference that I can tell seems to be in the use of anti estrogens where:

1) AIs are traditionally used on an as needed basis.

2) Safer use models avoid AIs by using minimal test doses and ramping up the anabolics, usually from DHTs.

There are claims of other differences but I feel those are mostly strawmans.

The purpose of the safer use model is apparently to provide a safer overall drug with the caveat that you're probably not going to grow as fast.

An example safer model cycle might be something like. Low dosing the lot:

1) As much test as the individual can handle without an AI. Let's say 300mg.
2) Additional DHT to bring up anabolic load.
3) Maybe nandrolone for joint support
4) GH & Slin
5) ARBs for various benefits
6) Clen or Tren for the anti catabolic effects
7) Various insulin sensitivity promoters

I think the additional stuff is mostly just good practice if you need it, so my question to you Promuscle centers around the main difference which seems to be in AI usage.

If safety is the number one concern (but you're still looking to pump it a little) is it better to use an AI or stack a bunch of primo or masteron to bring up total anabolics?

Pretty sure no one is gonna read past the first sentence so boobies boobies boobies

This has bees the trend amongst coaches in the uk for the past couple of years . Personally I think it’s bollox for the exact reasons given by @luki7788

 

[Oldwhitedude]

The hit on blood lipids with the likes of primo and mast is always what seems to be ignored by the safer model preachers. Arguably the alteration of lipids is certainly no safer in the long term

Definitely.

I also think there's potentially prostate issues brewing when combining higher estrogen and a lot of DHT. Seems to be the perfect combo.

I feel like the "safest use" model would just be test+gh+slin for me

That's what I've settled on for the most part.

 

[BigBaldBeardGuy]

How is this any more healthy though than increasing test and using an AI?

Not claiming you believe this, just an open ended question

Keep in mind these are doses that are closer to cruise doses than they are to blasts.

I believe the idea is that everything you take serves a purpose. And these are mild doses. A typical setup would look something like:

1) 300mg
2) 200mg Masteron or Primo
3) 50mg to 100mg nandrolone
4) 2iu GH & 10iu to 20iu Slin
5) 40mg telmisartan
6) 20ug Clen or 10mg Tren (as needed)
7) Various insulin sensitivity promoters
And
8) PPAR receptor agonist like cardarine

This is all based off of memory so I might have mistakes. I’m not positive about the clen or tren. They might not be in there.

 

[BigBaldBeardGuy]

Definitely.

I also think there's potentially prostate issues brewing when combining higher estrogen and a lot of DHT. Seems to be the perfect combo.



That's what I've settled on for the most part.

Estrogen isn’t supposed to be terribly elevated. A dose of testosterone slightly above TRT isn’t going to cause uncontrolled estrogen values.

And it’s not cycle doses of DHT either. It’s doses that a lot of guys will add to their cruise.

It’s lower doses, taking advantage of more of the anabolic pathways and it’s run for a longer period of time.
Vs.
Blast doses of steroids run for 8 to 16 weeks followed by a recovery period.

 

[Oldwhitedude]

Estrogen isn’t supposed to be terribly elevated. A dose of testosterone slightly above TRT isn’t going to cause uncontrolled estrogen values.

And it’s not cycle doses of DHT either. It’s doses that a lot of guys will add to their cruise.

It’s lower doses, taking advantage of more of the anabolic pathways and it’s run for a longer period of time.
Vs.
Blast doses of steroids run for 8 to 16 weeks followed by a recovery period.

So you're quite into it then? That's good man.

Just in your personal experience, what do your cycles look like? I respect peoples experiences a lot more than the current science or whatever, so it's good to chat about it.

 

[qbkilla]

It would make sense as to why someone at 13-15% bf would need an AI as more body fat seems to make one more susceptible to e2 issues. Would it make sense for someone to diet down to a truly lean state on trt dose before using higher doses of “wet” compounds?

Granted cutting on lower dose vs higher dose isn’t as fun and you’ll most likely will be flat and retain less muscle, but I think it would be worth it long term. Once they reach 6-8% bf they are in a much better state to gain significant lbm staying lean with less e2 issues.

That's my school of thought. Fat guys using AAS and thinking they need all this ai...if they got to a decent bf, probably wouldn't.

 

[southernmucle214]

Keep in mind these are doses that are closer to cruise doses than they are to blasts.

I believe the idea is that everything you take serves a purpose. And these are mild doses. A typical setup would look something like:

1) 300mg
2) 200mg Masteron or Primo
3) 50mg to 100mg nandrolone
4) 2iu GH & 10iu to 20iu Slin
5) 40mg telmisartan
6) 20ug Clen or 10mg Tren (as needed)
7) Various insulin sensitivity promoters
And
8) PPAR receptor agonist like cardarine

This is all based off of memory so I might have mistakes. I’m not positive about the clen or tren. They might not be in there.

I thought the mast or primo are usually dosed higher than the test and by a good bit. From the little I've seen it discussed, the idea is total mg matters more than the dose of a single compound. So if you need 1200-1500 mg total to grow that would be made up of your 300 test and you fill in the rest of the mg with your mast or primo and whatever else you're going to use.

 

[BigBaldBeardGuy]

So you're quite into it then? That's good man.

Just in your personal experience, what do your cycles look like? I respect peoples experiences a lot more than the current science or whatever, so it's good to chat about it.

I think it’s just a different approach is all.

I thought about staying on 400 test 250 mast year-round with 3iu of HGH figuring that’s nice and stable without any changes. But I didn’t want to explore cardarine and I don’t know enough about running insulin.

If you add up the total mg of steroids it’s actually a bit less running it year-round at these doses than doing two moderate blasts with a TRT cruise.

In theory I can see it being just as effective but who knows which is “safer”.

 

[BigBaldBeardGuy]

I thought the mast or primo are usually dosed higher than the test and by a good bit. From the little I've seen it discussed, the idea is total mg matters more than the dose of a single compound. So if you need 1200-1500 mg total to grow that would be made up of your 300 test and you fill in the rest of the mg with your mast or primo and whatever else you're going to use.

I haven’t seen that but I would agree that the way that’s set up would make no sense at all.