PDA

View Full Version : 300mg Test E vs 600mg Test E



BBG
11-06-2012, 04:50 AM
The following is part of a thread by heavyiron over at MD, the full abstact can be found here..Testosterone dose-response relationships in healthy young men -- Bhasin et al. 281 (6): E1172 -- AJP - Endocrinology and Metabolism

The following text outlines the benefits and risks of Testosterone administration based on a clinical human trial of 61 healthy men in 2001. The purpose of the trial was to determine the dose dependency of testosterone’s effects on fat-free mass and muscle performance. In this trial 61 men, 18-35years old were randomized into 5 groups receiving weekly injections of 25, 50, 125, 300, 600 mg of Testosterone enanthate for 20 weeks. They had previous weight-lifting experience and normal T levels. Their nutritional intake was standardized and they did not undertake any strength training during the trial. The only two groups that reported significant muscle building benefits were the 300 and 600 mg groups so any dose lower than 300mg will not be considered in this essay. 12 men participated in the 300 mg group and 13 men in the 600 mg group.

600mg of Testosterone a week for 20 weeks resulted in the following benefits. Increased fat free mass, muscle strength, muscle power, muscle volume, hemoglobin and igf-1.
The same 600 mg administration resulted in 2 side effects. HDL cholesterol was negatively correlated and 2 men developed acne.

The normal range for total T in men is 241-827 ng/dl according to Labcorp and 260-1000 ng/dl according to Quest Laboratories. The normal range for igf-1 is 81-225 according to Labcorp. Total T and igf-1 levels were taken after 16 weeks and resulted in the following;

Total Testosterone
300 mg group-1,345 ng/dl a 691 ng increase from baseline
600 mg group-2,370 ng/dl a 1,737 ng increase from baseline

igf-1
300 mg group-388 ng/dl a 74 ng increase from baseline
600 mg group-304 ng/dl a 77 ng increase from baseline

Body composition was measured after 20 weeks.

Fat Free Mass by underwater weighing
300 mg group-5.2kg (11.4lbs) increase
600 mg group-7.9kg (17.38lbs) increase

Fat Mass by underwater weighing
300 mg group-.5kg (1.1lbs) decrease
600 mg group-1.1kg (2.42lbs) decrease

Thigh Muscle Volume
300 mg group-84 cubic centimeter increase
600 mg group-126 cubic centimeter increase

Quadriceps Muscle Volume
300 mg group-43 cubic centimeter increase
600 mg group-68 cubic centimeter increase

Leg Press Strength
300 mg group-72.2kg (158.8lbs) increase
600 mg group-76.5kg (168.3lbs) increase

Leg Power
300 mg group-38.6 watt increase
600 mg group-48.1 watt increase

Hemoglobin
300 mg group-6.1 gram per liter increase
600 mg group-14.2 gram per liter increase

Plasma HDL Cholesterol
300 mg group-5.7 mg/dl decrease
600 mg group-8.4 mg/dl decrease

Acne
300 mg group-7 of the 12 men developed acne
600 mg group-2 of the 13 men developed acne

There were no significant changes in PSA or liver enzymes at any dose up to 600mg. However, long-term effects of androgen administration on the prostate, cardiovascular risk, and behavior are unknown. The study demonstrated that there is a dose dependant relationship with testosterone administration. In other words the more testosterone administered the greater the muscle building effects and potential for side effects.

Given the results of the study and based on years of personal experience I believe the first time user can safely use between 300-600 mg of testosterone enanthate or cypionate per week for 8-12 weeks. Because it is desirable to have even blood androgen levels I advise at least 2 equal injections per week. Testosterone cypionate peaks within 1-2 days after injection and falls off to almost baseline by day 10. Therefore waiting 7 days between injections of cypionate would cause wide fluctuations in blood androgen levels.


If a first time user wanted to use 600 mg of cypionate or enanthate per week he would inject 300 mg on Tuesday and another 300 mg on Saturday each week for 10 weeks. When injecting long heavy esters like cypionate with this frequency I tend to have less acne then 1 injection per week.

There are a number of esters which provide varying release times. Acetate or propionate esters extend the release time of testosterone a couple of days. In contrast, a deconate ester prolongs the release of testosterone about 3 weeks. Testosterone enanthate and cypionate are almost identical esters. The use of an ester allows for a less frequent injection schedule than using a water based testosterone like suspension which has no ester at all and is rapidly in and out of your system after injection. The published release times are not exact and are many times based on a single injection not many multiple injections which can delay the release of the hormone. Other factors affect release times of esters such as scar tissue and the muscle group injected. Only a blood test can confirm when the active hormone has cleared your system.

Esters not only effect release times but also the potency of the Testosterone as esters make up part of the steroid weight. This must be taken into account when calculating dosages. The longer the release time the less free hormone. For example propionate is about 15% more potent mg. for mg. then enanthate so 500mg of propionate would equal about 575 mg. of enanthate.

h2s
11-06-2012, 07:55 AM
I never understood the decrease in acne in this study with a high dose, 12/13 participants can still be considered a small sample, but should be adequate in demonstrating a trend imo. Weird.

BBG
11-06-2012, 08:01 AM
I never understood the decrease in acne in this study with a high dose, 12/13 participants can still be considered a small sample, but should be adequate in demonstrating a trend imo. Weird.

It's a pretty significant decrease. Maybe it has to do with the fact that blood levels of testosterone never really hit very low. IE, by the time the week is over, not much of that 300mg is really left. There is still a decent amount of the 600mg left.

Rodja
11-06-2012, 08:14 AM
They didn't lift and still gained that amount? Am I reading that right?

BBG
11-06-2012, 08:18 AM
They didn't lift and still gained that amount? Am I reading that right?

Apparently so. I can't access the full study, and the abstract does not mention if they trained or not.

Rodja
11-06-2012, 08:33 AM
Pmid?

BBG
11-06-2012, 08:39 AM
Testosterone dose-response rel... [Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2001] - PubMed - NCBI (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11701431)

I think this is it, I need to head out real fast though. Be back in a few.

Rodja
11-06-2012, 08:43 AM
Looks like it is and it specifically says no training in the methods section.

h2s
11-06-2012, 08:46 AM
Full: Testosterone dose-response relationships in healthy young men (http://ajpendo.physiology.org/content/281/6/E1172.full)

BBG
11-06-2012, 10:00 AM
I'm glad you pointed out that they were not training. That's pretty crazy.

burlyman30
11-06-2012, 10:18 AM
I'm glad you pointed out that they were not training. That's pretty crazy.

I guess all that crazy talk we promote about AAS not being "magic" and how important training is... just went out the window. lol.

I hope Ippy never sees this. :eek:

BBG
11-06-2012, 10:20 AM
I guess all that crazy talk we promote about AAS not being "magic" and how important training is... just went out the window. lol.

I never understood that logic. Given all other variables the same, someone with 300 ng/dl test levels and someone with 1200 ng/dl... who is going to be leaner and more muscular? And then extrapolate those results with someone taking 30mg of SD for 6 weeks lol

Rodja
11-06-2012, 10:25 AM
I guess all that crazy talk we promote about AAS not being "magic" and how important training is... just went out the window. lol.

I hope Ippy never sees this. :eek:

I wish there was a follow-up to this after 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months.

BBG
11-06-2012, 10:26 AM
I wish there was a follow-up to this after 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months.

Isn't that with all studies... I bet they would all be pretty run down from no PCT and a sudden lack of testosterone.

h2s
11-06-2012, 10:29 AM
Isn't that with all studies... I bet they would all be pretty run down from no PCT and a sudden lack of testosterone.

I had started reading Dr. Scally's book, and he discusses that it is common issue that a "post cycle" type therapy is not applied to study participants post study due to ignorance in the community, leaving many participants hypogonadal.

Rodja
11-06-2012, 10:32 AM
Isn't that with all studies... I bet they would all be pretty run down from no PCT and a sudden lack of testosterone.

As anyone that has ever had a bunk SERM will tell you.


I had started reading Dr. Scally's book, and he discusses that it is common issue that a "post cycle" type therapy is not applied to study participants post study due to ignorance in the community, leaving many participants hypogonadal.

Just goes to show that the medical community is very, very slow to adapt and change.

Eden
11-10-2012, 03:50 PM
The medical community is mostly a joke, all they are there to do is push you pharma. I'm not terribly surprised to see that the participants gained mass while not working out. But you see they didn't gain much strength just muscle, so you would figure that training along with AAS would have a compounding effect. Such as AAS increase musculature, training increases strength which further increases musculature, but I'm probably preaching to the choir here.

I do wonder why the medical community is so completely devoid of understanding of the endocrine system, I mean they can spout off about the cardio-pulminary system, but don't know jack about basic hormones.

Rodja
11-10-2012, 03:59 PM
The medical community is mostly a joke, all they are there to do is push you pharma. I'm not terribly surprised to see that the participants gained mass while not working out. But you see they didn't gain much strength just muscle, so you would figure that training along with AAS would have a compounding effect. Such as AAS increase musculature, training increases strength which further increases musculature, but I'm probably preaching to the choir here.

I do wonder why the medical community is so completely devoid of understanding of the endocrine system, I mean they can spout off about the cardio-pulminary system, but don't know jack about basic hormones.

The endocrine system is still relatively new science, but there is HUGE divide that is emerging regarding the role of cholesterol. For years, it has been the metabolic and health boogeyman, but it is finally starting to become accepting that atherosclerosis is the result of a poor lifestyle and not the cause of CV incidents. Cholesterol is found in every living cell and when there is excessive damage and stress in the heart (e.g. chronic inflammation), then you are going to have extra buildup of cholesterol due to the need for new cells to replace the damaged/dying ones. This is partially why many statins have NOT been shown to lower CV incident even though they do lower cholesterol

Eden
11-10-2012, 04:14 PM
I understand the endocrine system is relatively new. I am very well aware of the cholesterol science "changes" that are happening or more that fact that the medical community can't keep blaming something that doesn't do what they say it does.

Heart problems have always been caused by poor lifestyle, and poor eating habits. But due to some things we did in the 1950's we went down the wrong road and blamed Cholesterol, instead of the fact that people were eating trash, and cholesterol is more of a clean up crew than the problem.

Trigs have been found for the most part to be more indicative of heart problems, than cholesterol. I mean LDL isn't even measured in a standard lipid profile, it's just guessed at, when the particle count, and size are about all that matters in determining if there's going to be excessive buildup of VLDL in arterial walls.

I agree on the statins not lowering cholesterol levels, yet they are the largest portion of profits for pharma. I have heard that some places actually wanted to start putting statins IN the drinking water even though the study that proved they were effective (the Harvard Framingham Heart Study) only proved they provided like a 1.2% benefit.

Edit: I can go ON and ON about cholesterol, and cardio-pulminary health.

BBG
11-10-2012, 08:23 PM
The endocrine system is still relatively new science, but there is HUGE divide that is emerging regarding the role of cholesterol. For years, it has been the metabolic and health boogeyman, but it is finally starting to become accepting that atherosclerosis is the result of a poor lifestyle and not the cause of CV incidents. Cholesterol is found in every living cell and when there is excessive damage and stress in the heart (e.g. chronic inflammation), then you are going to have extra buildup of cholesterol due to the need for new cells to replace the damaged/dying ones. This is partially why many statins have NOT been shown to lower CV incident even though they do lower cholesterol

I love trying to explain why cholesterol is actually good for your heart, and insulin is what causes rogue LDL to cause blockages. But it's like trying to convince someone that something like gravity doesn't exist. It's like a fact to the layman that cholesterol is evil.

h2s
11-10-2012, 08:26 PM
I love trying to explain why cholesterol is actually good for your heart, and insulin is what causes rogue LDL to cause blockages. But it's like trying to convince someone that something like gravity doesn't exist. It's like a fact to the layman that cholesterol is evil.

I never get into it. I love especially when I am eating red meat..."man, someone doesn't have to watch their cholesterol" "Yep, someone doesn't"

BBG
11-10-2012, 08:30 PM
I never get into it. I love especially when I am eating red meat..."man, someone doesn't have to watch their cholesterol" "Yep, someone doesn't"

hahaha I just tell them... "Look at me. Look at yourself. Tell me why you're giving me diet advice."

Eden
11-10-2012, 08:32 PM
I love that too people tell me I need to stop eating eggs because there's too much cholesterol and I'm just like I actually know what cholesterol does and I will eat as many eggs as I damn well please.

burlyman30
11-10-2012, 10:26 PM
hahaha I just tell them... "Look at me. Look at yourself. Tell me why you're giving me diet advice."


I love that too people tell me I need to stop eating eggs because there's too much cholesterol and I'm just like I actually know what cholesterol does and I will eat as many eggs as I damn well please.

Nice comeback, guys. Lol. My cholesterol is dropping on a mostly primal diet and I let people know I have bloodwork to prove it.

On the acne inconsistency with test dosage, aromatization is higher with the higher dosage... the additional e2 may be acne-preventive. Women are put on estradiol-containing birth control for acne reduction.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Eden
11-10-2012, 11:07 PM
Very interesting Burly, I had forgotten that they prescribed birth control for acne in women, until you mentioned it.