Primobolan and Estrogen

[TomJ]

I’d be interested to see a side by side without the AI, just to rule out variables.

I’ve never ran an AI with primo because I don’t ever go above 500 test with it and there’s no need.

maybe i can play with that once im on a cruise after this show, with no AI on 500 test my e2 will be in the 170s. Im not one of the lucky ones that doesnt need an AI on 500mg. so i cant really try that with the amount of test im on now, but might be able to try it on a cruise+ dose later.

 

[TomJ]

That’s pretty interesting.

Fucking shoots my argument to shit now. @GreenAmine you are right to be researching this. I’ll shut the fuck up now!

there might be other factors at play between these two bloodworks, just for information's sake.

between these sets of bloodwork i had a really bad shot of that super crashed primo i had mentioned in other threads that got infected. So there is a round of antibiotics and a ton of Ibuprofen used between mays and this most recent set of bloods. Which i imagine might be the reason for the elevated ALT.

Dont know if this would have an effect on estrogen, but just for complete informations sake.

 

[Test_subject]

there might be other factors at play between these two bloodworks, just for information's sake.

between these sets of bloodwork i had a really bad shot of that super crashed primo i had mentioned in other threads that got infected. So there is a round of antibiotics and a ton of Ibuprofen used between mays and this most recent set of bloods. Which i imagine might be the reason for the elevated ALT.

Dont know if this would have an effect on estrogen, but just for complete informations sake.

What are your total and free test numbers for the two tests?

 

[GreenAmine]

there might be other factors at play between these two bloodworks, just for information's sake.

between these sets of bloodwork i had a really bad shot of that super crashed primo i had mentioned in other threads that got infected. So there is a round of antibiotics and a ton of Ibuprofen used between mays and this most recent set of bloods. Which i imagine might be the reason for the elevated ALT.

Dont know if this would have an effect on estrogen, but just for complete informations sake.

Thank you very much for posting the bloodwork! A 59% decrease is quite significant.

might be able to try it on a cruise+ dose later

This would be awesome, since as @Test_subject pointed out, it would eliminate an important variable.

Dont know if this would have an effect on estrogen, but just for complete informations sake.

I commend the thoroughness. This could have an impact, but as far as I know, none of those drugs affect aromatase. (I could definitely be wrong here.) If you were not administering exogenous test, all of that stress definitely could have a significant impact on hormone levels, but considering the amount you were using, I doubt this is an issue.

Thanks again for the data.

 

[TomJ]

What are your total and free test numbers for the two tests?

unsure, i dont get my testosterone checked, to keep the cost of my bloodwork low. since its basically a worthless marker, like checking ym FSH/LH.

my total is over 2700 at the trough on 500mg though.

 

[Test_subject]

unsure, i dont get my testosterone checked, to keep the cost of my bloodwork low. since its basically a worthless marker, like checking ym FSH/LH.

my total is over 2700 at the trough on 500mg though.

If you trust your gear that’s very true.

Same gear? And do you happen to know if it was the same batch?

I’m just trying to rule out you having lower test on the second set of bloods, which would result in lower overall estrogen. In your case, since you’re a high aromatizer, a moderate difference in testosterone could have a significant impact on E2.

 

[TomJ]

If you trust your gear that’s very true.

Same gear? And do you happen to know if it was the same batch?

I’m just trying to rule out you having lower test on the second set of bloods, which would result in lower overall estrogen. In your case, since you’re a high aromatizer, a moderate difference in testosterone could have a significant impact on E2.

I do trust it. Same batch

 

[GreenAmine]

That’s pretty interesting.

Fucking shoots my argument to shit now. @GreenAmine you are right to be researching this. I’ll shut the fuck up now!

I always like having a skeptic/devil's advocate in a discussion; it keeps me subjective, makes me question my own knowledge, and frequently forces me to read further into the topic. More often than I'd like, I convince myself that unproven hypotheses are fact, and this helps prevent that.

 

[TomJ]

itll be a hot minute until im back on a real cruise, but ill have plenty of primo left over, in case this thread dies someone remind me to run the experiment after my show is done!

 

[Test_subject]

itll be a hot minute until im back on a real cruise, but ill have plenty of primo left over, in case this thread dies someone remind me to run the experiment after my show is done!

If nothing else it’s a nice excuse to do a good old TRT+

 

[TomJ]

If nothing else it’s a nice excuse to do a good old TRT+

well what has felt the best for me to date was 150 test c a week and like 10mg of ment a day i think. and didnt hit my bloods at all. So im no stranger to TRT+.

After how agressive this prep protocol is though it might be quite a while until my bloods are back at a stable healthy level. I wont be doing any playing around with anything more than the absolute min TRT dose until then. I take my health VERY seriously.

 

[Clyde]

I'm beginning to think possibly the total androgen to estrogen ratio is more important than monitoring plasma E2 levels looking for a magic number.

Keep in mind how much more potent DHT is as an androgen compared to T, in tissue other than muscle, where it's deactivated. I'm also thinking total androgen / E2 levels in plasma would not be an accurate representation of total androgens to E2 levels/ratio because T is mostly converted to DHT in the tissue, and used as needed in place, rather than in circulating systemically in the plasma.

I recently read DHT possible interferes with E2 transcription at the cellular level. A lot of interesting related info in Meet the Steroid Experts - MESO-Rx.

The variation in how well one handles E2 may be related to how efficiently 5A-R converts T to DHT in the breast tissue. Some men seem more biologically primed to get gyno, whereas others seem unaffected by very high E2 levels.

Unrelated but in women, breast size/volume is very much variable as well. It's not like small breasted women are any more masculine than a large breasted woman or have way lower E2, or higher T levels. It may be somewhat useful to think about this as mirroring the variation in mens sensitivity to E2 levels.

If you suffer gyno symptoms easily from a little too much E2, perhaps you carry the "large breasts if you were a female" genetic markers. And guys on the opposite end of the spectrum have the "small breast if female" genetic makeup. Our biology simply didn't evolve to have to deal with what we're all doing regarding sex hormone manipulation.

 

[Zmn71]

Pulled bloods on 350/350 test/primo

Normally estrogen would be in high 80’s without primo.

 

[TomJ]

Pulled bloods on 350/350 test/primo

Normally estrogen would be in high 80’s without primo.

View attachment 25383

Any AI with this?

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[Zmn71]

Any AI with this?

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

No AI. Was testing the waters to see if I was one that got an AI effect from primo.


I also get the same reduction with EQ but that sends my E1 (estrone) thru the roof. 750/750 test/Eq will give me a e2 of 6 and an e1 of 2000

 

[Vegeta2632]

So I'm not going to get too in depth, but I'll give you me and a decade worth of clients and what their blood work said, which is anecdotal, but is proof for me, because it's repeatable and has the exact same result 100% of the time.
So, here it is. When I do primo and test, I MUST do a 1:1 ratio. If it's 600 test, it must be 600 primo.
Reason being, if I do 700 test and 600 primo, I eventually need an AI (confirmed by multiple bloodworks over the years). Or reverse, If I do 700 primo and 600 test, my e2 reduces too low, and I have massive e2 sides, and I end up having to increase test back to that 1:1 ratio. And when I do, e2 goes back up into perfect range, again, confirmed with bloodwork.
Years ago, I thought it was just me. Untill I started coaching npc and some ifbb athletes. They reacted in the exact same way I did. When I came across this problem, my first thought was, "maybe they react like me" - so I did what I did for my body and sure enough, this 1:1 golden primo ratio rule stands for everyone. So I use it for everyone now, and it hasn't failed yet. In sure there are some outliers out there that don't aromatize for shit, or aromatize too much, in which primo may not be strong enough to combat it. But I haven't came across anyone yet. And there have been 100s of clients now.
I don't claim to know the mechanism in which this works. Idk if it's a specific metabolite responsible for this action or if it's an un found mechanism direct from primo that was never observed.
Whatever the case is, I don't need to know because I always know how people will react, 100% of the time (atleast so far).
To me, this reminds me of anadrol. We still really don't know how its progestogenic activity works. But we have blood work with proof showing it activates that pathway somehow. According to it's science, it shouldn't be possible. But obviously the scientists involved missed something.
My take away for people on this subject is, find what works for you, verify it by repeating it on yourself and validate it with multiple blood works.

 

[TomJ]

So I'm not going to get too in depth, but I'll give you me and a decade worth of clients and what their blood work said, which is anecdotal, but is proof for me, because it's repeatable and has the exact same result 100% of the time.
So, here it is. When I do primo and test, I MUST do a 1:1 ratio. If it's 600 test, it must be 600 primo.
Reason being, if I do 700 test and 600 primo, I eventually need an AI (confirmed by multiple bloodworks over the years). Or reverse, If I do 700 primo and 600 test, my e2 reduces too low, and I have massive e2 sides, and I end up having to increase test back to that 1:1 ratio. And when I do, e2 goes back up into perfect range, again, confirmed with bloodwork.
Years ago, I thought it was just me. Untill I started coaching npc and some ifbb athletes. They reacted in the exact same way I did. When I came across this problem, my first thought was, "maybe they react like me" - so I did what I did for my body and sure enough, this 1:1 golden primo ratio rule stands for everyone. So I use it for everyone now, and it hasn't failed yet. In sure there are some outliers out there that don't aromatize for shit, or aromatize too much, in which primo may not be strong enough to combat it. But I haven't came across anyone yet. And there have been 100s of clients now.
I don't claim to know the mechanism in which this works. Idk if it's a specific metabolite responsible for this action or if it's an un found mechanism direct from primo that was never observed.
Whatever the case is, I don't need to know because I always know how people will react, 100% of the time (atleast so far).
To me, this reminds me of anadrol. We still really don't know how its progestogenic activity works. But we have blood work with proof showing it activates that pathway somehow. According to it's science, it shouldn't be possible. But obviously the scientists involved missed something.
My take away for people on this subject is, find what works for you, verify it by repeating it on yourself and validate it with multiple blood works.

how do you explain me, at 750 test a week, and 75 primo ED having perfectly in range e2?
making blanket statements like "always 1:1" is irresponsible and inaccurate

 

[BigBaldBeardGuy]

how do you explain me, at 750 test a week, and 75 primo ED having perfectly in range e2?
making blanket statements like "always 1:1" is irresponsible and inaccurate

So I'm not going to get too in depth, but I'll give you me and a decade worth of clients and what their blood work said, which is anecdotal, but is proof for me, because it's repeatable and has the exact same result 100% of the time.
So, here it is. When I do primo and test, I MUST do a 1:1 ratio. If it's 600 test, it must be 600 primo.
Reason being, if I do 700 test and 600 primo, I eventually need an AI (confirmed by multiple bloodworks over the years). Or reverse, If I do 700 primo and 600 test, my e2 reduces too low, and I have massive e2 sides, and I end up having to increase test back to that 1:1 ratio. And when I do, e2 goes back up into perfect range, again, confirmed with bloodwork.
Years ago, I thought it was just me. Untill I started coaching npc and some ifbb athletes. They reacted in the exact same way I did. When I came across this problem, my first thought was, "maybe they react like me" - so I did what I did for my body and sure enough, this 1:1 golden primo ratio rule stands for everyone. So I use it for everyone now, and it hasn't failed yet. In sure there are some outliers out there that don't aromatize for shit, or aromatize too much, in which primo may not be strong enough to combat it. But I haven't came across anyone yet. And there have been 100s of clients now.
I don't claim to know the mechanism in which this works. Idk if it's a specific metabolite responsible for this action or if it's an un found mechanism direct from primo that was never observed.
Whatever the case is, I don't need to know because I always know how people will react, 100% of the time (atleast so far).
To me, this reminds me of anadrol. We still really don't know how its progestogenic activity works. But we have blood work with proof showing it activates that pathway somehow. According to it's science, it shouldn't be possible. But obviously the scientists involved missed something.
My take away for people on this subject is, find what works for you, verify it by repeating it on yourself and validate it with multiple blood works.

It’s not 100% though. There’s bloodwork that shows it occurs. Then there is a lot of bloodwork showing it does not occur. So it’s not “proven”.

Your closing sentence is perfect though. I appreciate that. I just want to avoid “bioscience” where these newbs BELIEVE something to be the case when it might not be the case for them. That’s what seems to be going around a lot. Idiots saying “you don’t need an AI, bro, primo, masteron, EQ all ACT like an AI bro.” Then bro has titties 4 weeks later.

 

[Vegeta2632]

how do you explain me, at 750 test a week, and 75 primo ED having perfectly in range e2?
making blanket statements like "always 1:1" is irresponsible and inaccurate

I was saying for me, and for every client I've had that has been on a test/primo cycle has pretty much experienced the same thing. I also said that I know there are outliers out there, I've only heard of it and seen it online though. My real world experience and multiple blood works keeps being verified.
So I'm not saying this is concrete at all, cause for you apparently it's the opposite. As is Im sure for others too. I do worry tho, when people claim that e2 was in range, like with your claim, if they were taking an AI or other compounds in the stack that may have contributed to lower e2.
A lot of times people claim so and so, and low and behold, they were on 800mg bold/wk for the 12 weeks prior, and the ester is still lingering, causing again, lower e2. I'm not saying that's your situation, but just pointing it out.

Also, I just want to point out for you that 75 * 7 =525. And this would be closer to my one to one ratio, keeping e2 in range. I almost missed that because all I saw was the number 75, until I realized that was every day and added it up.

At the end of the day when I think we can take from this thread and all the information within it is that (like with everything) individual reaction is completely different. It's always going to be that way. I think we can gather data, and come to some common conclusions for most people, or you could say on average. But we could conclude that there Will always be a certain percentage of outliers that react in the opposite.

 

[Vegeta2632]

It’s not 100% though. There’s bloodwork that shows it occurs. Then there is a lot of bloodwork showing it does not occur. So it’s not “proven”.

Your closing sentence is perfect though. I appreciate that. I just want to avoid “bioscience” where these newbs BELIEVE something to be the case when it might not be the case for them. That’s what seems to be going around a lot. Idiots saying “you don’t need an AI, bro, primo, masteron, EQ all ACT like an AI bro.” Then bro has titties 4 weeks later.

Agreed. At the end of the day, People will have to experiment for themselves, because we will never be able to draw a conclusion for everyone in this matter, hence all the outliers in this thread. So The only thing this thread proved was that individual response varies.
And yes I by no means want to make the noobs believe one thing or another, but I would like them to draw information enough to make their own decisions. This thread is a wealth of information.