- Joined
- Dec 30, 2013
- Messages
- 21,359
- Reaction score
- 12,225
Pathetic.
Let’s clear up a misconception “TRT =/= Steroids”
- Thread starter UsernameLOL
- Start date
Pathetic.
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2007
- Messages
- 12,377
- Reaction score
- 16
You're pathetic, and a jackass to boot.
Get back to me after you've clocked almost two decades of training and have a shot back and knees and bone spurs everywhere.
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2013
- Messages
- 21,359
- Reaction score
- 12,225
Sounds like you should have mellowed out on the full contact, no-pads sparring. As for your back, try lifting with the knees (were they not "shot").
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2007
- Messages
- 12,377
- Reaction score
- 16
And you should have refrained from getting gangbanged by rotten bums in back alleys for quarters. But I'll take my shit over your AIDS.
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2013
- Messages
- 21,359
- Reaction score
- 12,225
And you should have refrained from getting gangbanged by rotten bums in back alleys for quarters. But I'll take my shit over your AIDS.
Yeah, riveting. Of course, none of that is true. Meanwhile, you're broken down at age 35 when most guys who train intelligently actually feel their best.
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2004
- Messages
- 35,182
- Reaction score
- 9,580
of course i cannot find it now - any google search with 'Dan Henderson TRT' only brings up obvious results - but there was an official year long study done with Henderson where they tested him weekly and he stayed below the low end of average threshold (and by that i mean, if the average is 300-1000 ng/dl, he stayed below 300) and still got ample positive physiological results. this study was used by AC's when deciding to allow TRT TUE's or not.
i admit there is a lot to roll your eyes about in the above paragraph. first, i'm suggesting evidence i cannot source. second, i'm suggesting there is something called 'responsible amount of TRT' which may be counter-intuitive today, but from 2007 to 2013 was either widely accepted or heavily debated (depending on who you ask), but certainly not dismissed the way fans may dismiss it today.
so my point is that using 2010 standards, those who accepted TRT TUE's had in mind something like that usage - small doses to get a fighter to a minimum allowable threshold. and instead - as TS explained in the OP (badly, IMO) - fighters immediately started abusing it. which shouldn't surprise anyone.
and don't get me wrong; i'm no TRT fan. i was glad everyone finally agreed to drop TRT TUE's.
~~~
so, if you believe my memory (and again, i wish i could find the source and am sorry i cannot) then Hendo would have been the one exception that proves the rule, and only all but one abused the program. if you don't believe my memory, they all abused the program. the difference is negligible, because the point is the same; AC's started a TRT TUE program, didn't monitor/regulate it effectively, and all or all but one fighter heavily abused the program.
cheers.
Most testosterone comes as 250mg/cc so he may be vague but his numbers are jiving. 500-750mg would be cycling level, 125-250 would be TRT level.
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2007
- Messages
- 12,377
- Reaction score
- 16
Nah. 35 is the exact stretch of time that old injuries come home to roost.
None of which bothers me. I feel fine and I look good and I make do in the gym and my test levels are still high normal. Doesn't mean I can't wonder what TRT would do for me after clean training for so long.
You just have a dick up your ass for whatever reason. But that's your lookout.
- Joined
- May 12, 2015
- Messages
- 1,534
- Reaction score
- 1,652
I wrote the following in a "PED related" thread but I'll copy-paste here because I think it's really worrisome to read of 35 (or 45 for that matter) y.o. guys with no particular medical conditions who are seriously considering TRT protocol ... it will quite possibly affect your hormonal balance for life, potentially mess with several internal organs and ... you most probably do not need it!
Additionally, in relation to chronic injuries (someone mentioned wear and tear) ... there are plenty of "non-chemical" remedies (specific exercises, physical therapy, targeted nutrition, natural supplements, etc) which can and will improve or resolve most conditions if implemented appropriately and diligently.
From the prior PED thread (the discussion was more performance-fitness oriented).
Many replies unfortunately are reflective of the reality I see every day (I am a former pro athlete and work in the wellness / fitness industry).
All PEDs have side effects and can create some physiological or psychological dependency ... they are therefore relatively unsafe except for very specific medical conditions (although they still have side effects even in those needed cases).
If you take them because you have one of those real conditions, or because you are a risk-prone pro athlete looking for that last extra boost to "level the playing field" and hopefully succeed, then it's understandable (although in the second case ethically wrong).
But if you are anyone else, who is almost certainly NOT training / eating / resting in optimal ways, then sorry but you are a fool ... 99% of people could have BETTER results by simply training / eating / resting in the best way possible for their physiology, age, genetics and objectives.
There are plenty of normal people (not genetic freaks) in their 50s with great physiques and more importantly healthy bodies, simply by focusing on training and eating very diligently. Which by the way often does not mean training more but rather training smarter and more effectively.
PEDs are a "short cut" with ultimately a short lifespan and some potentially very long consequences. They cost your money and possibly your health.
Stay away! Focus on training and eating right!
Additionally, in relation to chronic injuries (someone mentioned wear and tear) ... there are plenty of "non-chemical" remedies (specific exercises, physical therapy, targeted nutrition, natural supplements, etc) which can and will improve or resolve most conditions if implemented appropriately and diligently.
From the prior PED thread (the discussion was more performance-fitness oriented).
Many replies unfortunately are reflective of the reality I see every day (I am a former pro athlete and work in the wellness / fitness industry).
All PEDs have side effects and can create some physiological or psychological dependency ... they are therefore relatively unsafe except for very specific medical conditions (although they still have side effects even in those needed cases).
If you take them because you have one of those real conditions, or because you are a risk-prone pro athlete looking for that last extra boost to "level the playing field" and hopefully succeed, then it's understandable (although in the second case ethically wrong).
But if you are anyone else, who is almost certainly NOT training / eating / resting in optimal ways, then sorry but you are a fool ... 99% of people could have BETTER results by simply training / eating / resting in the best way possible for their physiology, age, genetics and objectives.
There are plenty of normal people (not genetic freaks) in their 50s with great physiques and more importantly healthy bodies, simply by focusing on training and eating very diligently. Which by the way often does not mean training more but rather training smarter and more effectively.
PEDs are a "short cut" with ultimately a short lifespan and some potentially very long consequences. They cost your money and possibly your health.
Stay away! Focus on training and eating right!
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2004
- Messages
- 35,182
- Reaction score
- 9,580
the first several paragraphs are fine, albeit a bit overbearing. and this
is absolutely true. however, most folks like short cuts. hell, you can work out without a gym if you want and get super fit; a gym aint nuthin but a shortcut.
but this
is more a matter of faith than scientifically proven. what has been proven is that massive amounts of steroids - just like massive amounts of most things - can have some potentially very long consequences, and potentially (not "ultimately" as you say) as short lifespan.
the pro-roid folks aren't wrong when they say that this stuff simply hasn't been fully tested properly. like marijuana, salt causing hypertension, and the food pyramid, the more we learn, the more we find out we jumped to early wrong conclusions.
TLDR: if a 35 year old average non professional athlete dude wants a chiseled 6-pack and feel younger but doesn't want to do it the hard way, fuck it, power to him. just don't go overboard, and acknowledge that even in small doses it may or may not have long term consequences.
is absolutely true. however, most folks like short cuts. hell, you can work out without a gym if you want and get super fit; a gym aint nuthin but a shortcut.
but this
is more a matter of faith than scientifically proven. what has been proven is that massive amounts of steroids - just like massive amounts of most things - can have some potentially very long consequences, and potentially (not "ultimately" as you say) as short lifespan.
the pro-roid folks aren't wrong when they say that this stuff simply hasn't been fully tested properly. like marijuana, salt causing hypertension, and the food pyramid, the more we learn, the more we find out we jumped to early wrong conclusions.
TLDR: if a 35 year old average non professional athlete dude wants a chiseled 6-pack and feel younger but doesn't want to do it the hard way, fuck it, power to him. just don't go overboard, and acknowledge that even in small doses it may or may not have long term consequences.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2011
- Messages
- 7,247
- Reaction score
- 344
noice ill check it out. yep noticed that too. I got off it real quick, its poison
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2013
- Messages
- 11,214
- Reaction score
- 1,198
Something I'm curious about.
Are Test cycles the same as TRT? If not how?
Are Test cycles the same as TRT? If not how?
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 20,363
- Reaction score
- 405
Most are not all. Is not a given. You have cyp which comes 200/2 ml, e test comes 250/ml. Prop normally comes 50/75 mg/ml.
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2003
- Messages
- 9,473
- Reaction score
- 13,674
100% covered by health care here in Canada. Suck it, big brother.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2005
- Messages
- 5,091
- Reaction score
- 707
I don't know what the clinics charge, but if you have low test you can go to a doctor with your insurance and pay cash for the test at the pharmacy.
10ml/200mg per ml, test cyp bottles are under $100 USD at the pharmacy. All you need is a doctors prescription and if you truly have low test it is easy to get. Syringes are a few dollars.
Basic trt dose is 100-150mg a week, so a bottle lasts 7-10 weeks.
It's cheap.
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2009
- Messages
- 22,728
- Reaction score
- 2,861
Black market in the U.K. your looking at 100 quid for a few months worth
But it's dodgy and I'd rather do it properly
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 1,594
- Reaction score
- 588
My sympathies are with euro sherbros who don’t have access to TRT clinics.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2009
- Messages
- 14,935
- Reaction score
- 190
The only thing ever was hendo himself sayimg he was regularly tested ....which private trt /microdosing anti ageing etc clinics do anyway
Id highly doubt the cash strapped half assed acs ran any monitering program themselves ..it wasnt til that new ex fbi agent took over one of the major acs that the usada testing and trt ban came in (ufc jumping before it was pushed really)
