Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
Research Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsResearch Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic

Proviron added with Sarms?

I wouldn't just "throw it it". You can run it up to 12 weeks depending on your cycle. 25mg/day works good for me. Just because a lot of people recommend running 50mg/day doesn't mean that's better. More is not always better. I would time it that you run it (depending on your cycle) at the end and all the way through PCT.
 
Both of these..

it can work effectively in pct/cruises and whatnot... Proviron is a Swiss army knife of a compound.. there is data supporting that it is NOT suppressive , and I seen data that shown just a faction of % with slight decbile changes that it was suprressive, and the conclusion from that test cited it was NOT suppressive based on the slight variance and drop..
You can use prov with anything,and year around

I will just say I have run sarms alone and I wasnt that suppressed.

In my thread I added 50mg/day proviron for 8 weeks and my total test was at 25 so maybe its just me but it suppressed the hell out of me.
 
I will just say I have run sarms alone and I wasnt that suppressed.

In my thread I added 50mg/day proviron for 8 weeks and my total test was at 25 so maybe its just me but it suppressed the hell out of me.

That's odd.. there's studies were they've included numerous people in this never happened. There's numerous articles out there along with studies and even the the original manufacturer that compounded and synthesize this compound stand firm with their data that it is not suppressive.
Sarms are NOT suppressive by nature, but I'm wondering if they did affect this and what brand Proviron did you use?
 
That's odd.. there's studies were they've included numerous people in this never happened. There's numerous articles out there along with studies and even the the original manufacturer that compounded and synthesize this compound stand firm with their data that it is not suppressive.
Sarms are NOT suppressive by nature, but I'm wondering if they did affect this and what brand Proviron did you use?
I thought Rad140 was very suppressive?
 
That's odd.. there's studies were they've included numerous people in this never happened. There's numerous articles out there along with studies and even the the original manufacturer that compounded and synthesize this compound stand firm with their data that it is not suppressive.
Sarms are NOT suppressive by nature, but I'm wondering if they did affect this and what brand Proviron did you use?

The sarms were a blend of sarms1 and esarms.

Proviron was Euro-Pharmacy got from PSL.

Again im just giving my feedback. I have the bloodwork posted there. Ive run sarms and the same cycle as this past time only change was 50mg of proviron a day and again was shut down hard.

Im sure it impacts people differently thats just why I always say run bloods and see what they say.
 
Very... no... to some degree, yes
this... Not very.. there has been some slight degree in "some" users but its not typically common, like anything else in life people will and may respond differently, so many things to consider and influences and factors

- - - Updated - - -

The sarms were a blend of sarms1 and esarms.

Proviron was Euro-Pharmacy got from PSL.

Again im just giving my feedback. I have the bloodwork posted there. Ive run sarms and the same cycle as this past time only change was 50mg of proviron a day and again was shut down hard.

Im sure it impacts people differently thats just why I always say run bloods and see what they say.
this is the first same I have even seen with "shut down", let alone "hard"..
 
I will just say I have run sarms alone and I wasnt that suppressed.

In my thread I added 50mg/day proviron for 8 weeks and my total test was at 25 so maybe its just me but it suppressed the hell out of me.
Here is a thread "feedback" where I was battling with a nit wit over at BOP.. I just copied my reply, so these words don't apply to you, but rather the evidence in why it proves that Proviron was "scrapped" from this study below as being said to be none suppresive, the study was based around other things but the point and case is that it was found and cited to be none suppresive.. The other poster was even going as far as claiming it has harsh on the liver... LOL.. Anyhow, I hope this information explains enough in detail that the chances of being shut down is very very slim, and if there is any suppession its on such a small scale that numbers hardly even changed to being remotely detrimental or of any concern..

__________________________________________________


Per your comment about about Proviron "being extremely harsh on lipids". In the one study you provided it contradicts your statement. The values hardly budged, the researchers even stress No or small changes..Not entirely "extremely harsh" after all.
(read chart below that I highlighted and the underlined conclusion)
AwkXxim.png

QZ8qSwB.png



Your statement that Proviron is suppressive again fails to provide anything tangible or any real substance that should be placed into great consideration with hindering someones PCT or even LH levels for that matter.
The subject below was NOT on testosterone, unlike the other test subjects.. Here you can clearly see his LH dropped "0.33" and this is coming from an individual that "already" had a predisposition with androgen deficiencies condition.
If you call that suppressive than I'm certain you believe in mystical dragons too. The Endocrine Society didn't even bat an eye to it, they simply said the subject "had a slight decrease"..However they never said it was from the drug, this is just their results a year later on a MALE that already had a predisposition with andro's and to boot - he didn't even have an "Exogenous" resource like the other test subjects had.. Therefore his condition could have been deteriorating regardless, thus a good reason why they may have scrapped the Masterolone test subject in the end. It failed to provide any real concrete evidence..

Look at the rest of the test subjects, almost all completely tanked "0" with "significant suppression of LH and FSH" , that is what defines the nature of a drug that is suppressive in nature..Landslide!
So come on man, don't give me that suppressive nonsense or "extremely harsh on lipid values" crap..

5PEzcMZ.png

FywjcB3.png




Scrap the rat study, scrap the study with subjects that mostly all had a andro predisposition..

In my OP I posted studies that can support what I see and recognize as bonafide, one of the studies is on "normal males"

ABSTRACT
Mesterolone (1α-methyl-5α-dihydrotestosterone) has been given to 10 normal men, age 24–27 years, and the effect on the plasma levels of ICSH, FSH and testosterone has been studied.No effect on the plasma levels of ICSH and FSH could be detected. After 4 weeks on 75 mg mesterolone per day a significant (P < 0.01) drop in the mean value for plasma testosterone level was observed, 5.2 to 4.0 ng/ml. After another 4 weeks on 150 mg mesterolone per day a further decrease to 3.5 ng/ml was found.During mesterolone administration the protein binding of testosterone in plasma was significantly reduced, and it appeared that the level of free (non-protein bound) testosterone in diluted plasma remained unchanged, 0.37 and 0.41 ng/ml, before and after mesterolone administration respectively.The results suggest that mesterolone given in doses of 75 and 150 mg/day to normal men does not suppress the pituitary ICSH production or the testicular testosterone production

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GORDON, R.D., THOMAS, M.J., POYNTING, J.M. and STOCKS, A.E. (1975), Effect of Mesterolone on Plasma L.H., F.S.H. and Testosterone. Andrologia, 7: 287–296. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0272.1975.tb00942.x
Summary
It has been claimed that orally administered mesterolone, unlike l7a-methyl testo- sterone, does not suppress endogenous gonadotrophins and testesterone. To investi- gate this, both drugs were administered, in turn, to four normal men and plasma te- stosterone, L.H. and F.S.H. were measured serially. Mesterolone administration was associated in all four subjects with significant and similar falls in plasma testosterone, but significant suppression of gonadotrophins took place in only two of them. Any changes which occured were apparent by the end of the first week of therapy. Administration of half the dose of 17a-methyl testosterone to the same four subjects caused significant suppression of testosterone in each and suppression of one or both gonadotrophins in each.
In longer term studies in patients (5-30 months) involving serial measurements at intervals of one to two months, there was evidence of significant suppression of L.H. and F.S.H. by 17a-methyl testosterone, but not by mesterolone, which was clinically a less effective androgen.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WANG, C., BURGER, H.G., de KRETSER, D.M., DULMANIS, A., HUDSON, B., KEOGH, E.J. and SUTHERS, M.B. (1974), Effect of Mesterolone on Serum FSH, LH and Plasma Testosterone in Normal Men. Andrologia, 6: 111–117. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0272.1974.tb01604.x

Summary

To determine whether the claim that mesterolone, an orally active androgen, does not cause suppression of gonadotrophin secretion, two groups of five normal men were treated with 100 and 200 mg. daily respectively for 7 days. Serial measurements of serum FSH, LH and plasma testosterone were made on samples taken at 15 minute intervals over 2 hr both before and during treatment. Modest falls in FSH, LH and testosterone levels were observed in both groups, the percentage suppression being 21% and 18% for FSH, 19% and 15% for LH and 9% and 8% for testosterone at the lower and higher dosage levels respectively.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

200mg is a far greater dose than I would deploy during PCT (50mgs is ideal). From these studies and other articles we see have read, it's clear that there is almost minimal/no influence on the HTPA, any effect would be absolute minimal and negated by other appropriate compounds used during that period (HCG, Aromasin, Nolvadex and HGH)...[/QUOTE

“The paradoxical reduction in TT (p .012), with no change in cFT, reflects a significant reduction in SHBG due to the suppression of endogenous testosterone synthesis by this form of treatment, as indicated by the slight decrease in LH and FSH.” I am not going to split hairs with you. Did fsh go up? Did LH go up? Did total test go up. The answer is no. By all means post your 7 months of legible “lab work” and show me your healthy LH and FSH levels please include lipids too.
 
What do you think is the best timing for Proviron dosing? I wake up at 545am take 25mg mk2866, 20mg Cardarine, just added in 10mg rad140, and now 25mg Proviron. I workout at around 430 should I dose the second 2g about 12 hours later than the first so post workout?
 
I take all my Proviron first thing in the morning with no issues, however if you really want you can split your dosage through the day
 
I take all my Proviron first thing in the morning with no issues, however if you really want you can split your dosage through the day

I take all of my Proviron at once too. I’ve split the dose am and pm and noticed no difference at all. Based on the half life, once per day is fine. Don’t overthink it
 
Isnt it a 12 hour half life?
It is indeed, and I have split my dose before for that reason, but didnt really notice a difference. To be clear, I'm not advocating that you can't or shouldn't split the dose. On paper you probably should.
 
Who sells provarian?

That's odd.. there's studies were they've included numerous people in this never happened. There's numerous articles out there along with studies and even the the original manufacturer that compounded and synthesize this compound stand firm with their data that it is not suppressive.
Sarms are NOT suppressive by nature, but I'm wondering if they did affect this and what brand Proviron did you use?
 
Back
Top Bottom