will 10mg of dbol supress my natural production?

Originally posted by Ladaca Wow, I thought for sure 10mgs of Dbol would shut you down. This is good to know so I can take it when I'm off my cycle. it may shut you down if you take it for a few weeks but im thinking from what he posted he only took it one day

5mg of dianabol is roughly equivilant to a days supply of androgen for the average male so its hard to believe that 10 mg would shut someones normal test production down, does anybody have any medical documentation to this?

I did a little dumb and worthless thing back when I was like 19, took 1dbol (5mg) a day for a month. I just wanted to "try" so to speak... gained 6 pounds, did no PCT, and kept all gains. should have waited a few more years and do a proper cycle instead, but I got no sideeffects. Didn't notice any test.shutdown either.. but then the dose was so small.

Originally posted by hellspawn1 I did a little dumb and worthless thing back when I was like 19, took 1dbol (5mg) a day for a month. I just wanted to "try" so to speak... gained 6 pounds, did no PCT, and kept all gains. should have waited a few more years and do a proper cycle instead, but I got no sideeffects. Didn't notice any test.shutdown either.. but then the dose was so small. What was so dumb about your tesstingt the waters like that? I know....you must be referring to the age old bullshit"Your first cycle is always your best!" been repeated a million times & still going . The reality is ,your 100th cycle could be your best. You didn't waste yourself like the constantly repeated shit you've heard. WAs your first ejaculationor piece of ass your best? If you think so..don't get you any pussy for awhile. Then hook up with a perect face & body babe and see if you think you ruined yourself by fucking what you now realize was a skank you really didn't have a clue about putting the meat to.....if the chemistry is right it'll always be better!!!!!

The AM schedule can be used with less inhibition BUt there will still be some. Although dbol has a short half life, the estrogen hangs around a while - somehting which bros dont pick up on. If you take it in the middle of the day you are asking for trouble. I think dbol lhas no place in bridging for safety reasons since it is oral and dangerous and impairs cholesterol metabolism etc - not something that should be ongoing. Even on cycle it is dangerous because you may spend half a year with bad levels. Thats my rant out of the way now.

Originally posted by stan The AM schedule can be used with less inhibition BUt there will still be some. Although dbol has a short half life, the estrogen hangs around a while - somehting which bros dont pick up on. If you take it in the middle of the day you are asking for trouble. I think dbol lhas no place in bridging for safety reasons since it is oral and dangerous and impairs cholesterol metabolism etc - not something that should be ongoing. Even on cycle it is dangerous because you may spend half a year with bad levels. Thats my rant out of the way now. - Test AND LH levels peak in the first hours of sleep, not in the morning. Anyone thinking that you can trick the body by mimicking a test spike doesn't understand the first thing about endocrinology. - The metabolite of D-bol is 17 methyl estradiol. It is more potent and suppressive than D-bol itself. People don't understand estrogen along with its metabolites shuts down your HPTA. Its half-life is also 2 days so there goes your 4-5 hour half-life crap. - 2.5mg of Anavar has been shown to suppress you and its much less suppressive than any aromatizing hormone. What do you think 10mg of D-bol will do? Stan you hit it somewhat on the head. Just though I'd explain it a little bit better.

every documentation i have read says dianabols half life is 3-5 hours? where do get 2 days from i would like to read up on that? i have also read that low dosages of anavar note minimal interferences with natural test production? would like to have your source of information so i can read up on it...thanks bro

Originally posted by minimus every documentation i have read says dianabols half life is 3-5 hours? where do get 2 days from i would like to read up on that? i have also read that low dosages of anavar note minimal interferences with natural test production? would like to have your source of information so i can read up on it...thanks bro I said the metabolite of D-bol, 17 methyl estradiol has a half-life of 2 days. Its just, if not more suppressive than D-bol. People forget the metabolites suppress you too. Efficacy of a 3-substituted versus 17-substituted chemical delivery system for estradiol brain targeting. Brewster ME, Druzgala PJ, Anderson WR, Huang MJ, Bodor N, Pop E. Pharmos Corp., Alachua, FL 32615. Brain-targeted delivery of estrogens has been achieved by a chemical delivery system (CDS) in which a molecular targetor (1-methyl-1,4-dihydronicotinate) was attached to the 17-alcohol of estradiol. Optimization of this effect was attempted with the isomeric 3-phenol ester. Estradiol 3-nicotinate was prepared with nicotinic anhydride, which selectively acylated the phenol position. Methylation and reduction gave estradiol 3-(1-methyl-1,4-dihydronicotinate) of the 3-E2-CDS. Theoretical and electrochemical investigation indicated that the 3-E2-CDS was more stable to oxidation than was the prototype 17-ester (17-E2-CDS). Systemic administration of the 17-E2-CDS produced high levels of the corresponding quaternary salt in the brain of rats, which disappeared with an estimated half-life of > 2 days, but 3-E2-CDS dosing resulted in no significant quaternary salt trapping. Pharmacological activity was potent and sustained after 17-E2-CDS dosing but transient after 3-E2-CDS administration. Thus, the 3-E2-CDS reduced the rate of weight gain in male rats but to a lesser extent and for a shorter duration than did the 17-E2-CDS. Similar effects were seen on pituitary hypertrophy, reduction in serum androgen concentrations, and involution of prostate and seminal vesicles. The results of these studies suggest that placement of the targeting ester at the phenol position increases dihydropyridine stability but, at the same time, reduces brain sequestration. Here's the study on Var. Effect of low dose oxandrolone and testosterone treatment on the pituitary-testicular and GH axes in boys with constitutional delay of growth and puberty. Crowne EC, Wallace WH, Moore C, Mitchell R, Robertson WH, Holly JM, Shalet SM. Department of Endocrinology, Christie Hospital Trust, Manchester, UK. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of low dose oxandrolone and testosterone on the pituitary-testicular and GH-IGF-I axes. DESIGN: Prospective double-blind placebo-controlled trial. PATIENTS: Sixteen boys with constitutional delay of growth and puberty (CDGP) with testicular volumes 4-6 ml were randomized to 3 months treatment: Group 1 (n = 5), daily placebo: Group 2 (n = 5), 2.5 mg oxandrolone daily or Group 3 (n = 6), 50 mg testosterone monthly intramuscular injections with assessment (growth, pubertal development and overnight hormone profiles) at 0, 3, 6 and 12 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: LH and GH profiles (15-minute samples) were analysed by peak detection (Pulsar), Fourier transformation and autocorrelation. Testosterone levels were measured hourly and insulin, SHBG, IGF-I, and IGFBP-3 levels at 0800 h. Statistical analysis was by multivariate analysis of variance for repeated measures. RESULTS: LH and testosterone pdragon pharmameters increased significantly with time in all 16 (LH AUC, P < 0.001; peak amplitude, P = 0.02; number of peaks, P = 0.02; testosterone AUC, P = 0.02; morning testosterone, P = 0.002). In Group 2, however, LH and testosterone pdragon pharmameters decreased at 3 months followed by a rebound increase at 6 and 12 months. SHBG levels were markedly reduced at 3 months (P = 0.006) and a wider range of dominant GH frequencies was present although GH AUC was not increased until 6 months, with an increase in GH pulse frequency but not amplitude. IGF-I levels were increased at both 3 and 12 months. In Group 3, pituitary-testicular suppression was not apparent, but GH levels increased with an increase in GH amplitude at 3 and 12 months. CONCLUSION: Oxandrolone transiently suppressed the pituitary-testicular axis and altered GH pulsatility. Testosterone increased GH via amplitude modulation.

Originally posted by EZstreet I know....you must be referring to the age old bullshit"Your first cycle is always your best!" been repeated a million times & still going . The reality is ,your 100th cycle could be your best. You didn't waste yourself like the constantly repeated shit you've heard. I totally disagree with that statement I and every single person i know or have spoken to all say there first cycle was "CLEARLY" there best

good explaination satchmo

Originally posted by Real1ty I totally disagree with that statement I and every single person i know or have spoken to all say there first cycle was "CLEARLY" there best I'm going to have to totally disagree with you. ANYTHING ONE HAS NEVER EXPERIENCED BEFORE WILL BE THE MOST INTENSE THE FIRST TIME SIMPLY BECAUSE BEFORE THAT THERE WAS NOT ANYTHING TO COMPARE THE NEW EXPERIENCE TO. Your logic dictates that there is a biochemical occurence that is forever changed once an anabolic androgenic substance is introduced into the organism. I have never read this in any medical literature and very much doubt it exists. Also by your logic you imply that anybody will have had the best reaction no matter what there first cycle was-which is a contradicting statement.And who's or what is established for these people that determines whether they fucked up their"first cycle" & supposedly "missed out on the best cycle of their lives?" I'm saying it's more psychological than physical! First hit of crack,first drunk,first pussy,first acid trip,first high off of weed,first candybar;they can't be topped ??? It's all relative to ones state of mind. Obviously with roids first time can be can be topped no matter what the dosages were ,because look at who keeps growing and putting on more poundages than ever before in their careers & lives. Once again just perpetuated bullshit. ANYTHING AND EVERTHING CAN GET MORE INTENSE TILL THE DAY YOU DIE. One more thing: What is your defenition of best cycle of your life? Mine was when I figured out how & what to eat,was getting enough sleep. I had put on 25 lbs of lean beef with b/f% not exceeding 14%-probably somewhere between 10-14%(yeah I know fatass by bb standards,but not my point) had veins coming outta everywhere but my lower abs weighing in at 275lbs and could dead 550 for reps & put 305 over my head (smith for reps)..fuck it I could go on & on...anyhow looked and felt the best EVER in my life! This was my 10th so called cycle. I damn sure never got results like that off my first. The first just opened my eyes....to another world I never dreamed existed.

Originally posted by EZstreet I'm going to have to totally disagree with you. ANYTHING ONE HAS NEVER EXPERIENCED BEFORE WILL BE THE MOST INTENSE THE FIRST TIME SIMPLY BECAUSE BEFORE THAT THERE WAS NOT ANYTHING TO COMPARE THE NEW EXPERIENCE TO. Your logic dictates that there is a biochemical occurence that is forever changed once an anabolic androgenic substance is introduced into the organism. I have never read this in any medical literature and very much doubt it exists. Also by your logic you imply that anybody will have had the best reaction no matter what there first cycle was-which is a contradicting statement.And who's or what is established for these people that determines whether they fucked up their"first cycle" & supposedly "missed out on the best cycle of their lives?" I'm saying it's more psychological than physical! First hit of crack,first drunk,first pussy,first acid trip,first high off of weed,first candybar;they can't be topped ??? It's all relative to ones state of mind. Obviously with roids first time can be can be topped no matter what the dosages were ,because look at who keeps growing and putting on more poundages than ever before in their careers & lives. Once again just perpetuated bullshit. ANYTHING AND EVERTHING CAN GET MORE INTENSE TILL THE DAY YOU DIE. One more thing: What is your defenition of best cycle of your life? Mine was when I figured out how & what to eat,was getting enough sleep. I had put on 25 lbs of lean beef with b/f% not exceeding 14%-probably somewhere between 10-14%(yeah I know fatass by bb standards,but not my point) had veins coming outta everywhere but my lower abs weighing in at 275lbs and could dead 550 for reps & put 305 over my head (smith for reps)..fuck it I could go on & on...anyhow looked and felt the best EVER in my life! This was my 10th so called cycle. I damn sure never got results like that off my first. The first just opened my eyes....to another world I never dreamed existed. Obviously anything first time is going to be "the best" when you have nothing to compare it to but i am talking about myself and many others that have experienced plenty of cycles to compare it to and they all say the same thing.They put on more size and got stronger than any other cycle they have ever done on far less. So just on a mg by mg level it will win hands down and even when you up your doses you still dont grow or get as strong as on your first. Now i dont claim to know it all or am i goona sprout off that your comments are bullshit but maybe its got something to do with the recpetors being far more responsive...I dont know Know one thing you did say that you are completely wrong about is that ,(and i quote)"Once again just perpetuated bullshit. ANYTHING AND EVERTHING CAN GET MORE INTENSE TILL THE DAY YOU DIE." This is incorrect as anyone who has done/does rec drugs will tell you your body starts to become used to it and it takes more and more for it to work and it still isnt the same as the first few times I agree with you that your best cycle CAN be after you have made many mistakes and worked out how to train/eat what to use etc etc but if you had of applied that to your first cycle it would blow away anything you will do now Whether you like it or not its a fact that the body gets used to things and its just not like the first time

Originally posted by Real1ty Know one thing you did say that you are completely wrong about is that ,(and i quote)"Once again just perpetuated bullshit. ANYTHING AND EVERTHING CAN GET MORE INTENSE TILL THE DAY YOU DIE." This is incorrect as anyone who has done/does rec drugs will tell you your body starts to become used to it and it takes more and more for it to work and it still isnt the same as the first few times Whether you like it or not its a fact that the body gets used to things and its just not like the first time The body also has the ability to return to homestasis given enough time. Notice how I chose the word 'intense' and not the word 'better'? I was making an attempt to seperate the confusion and your anticipation of my meaning the use of more drugs becoming & making things better...forgetting about the point of diminishing returns...I know all about various recreational drugs from first hand experience and you can always get more high on certain things to the point of death. But an addict can also QUIT for a while. if for long enough he will go back to getting high (for a minute) to thepint of around when he first started-this fact I'm all to aware of. AS for it being like the first time, most likely never-you are only a virgin once. Now I believe this is what we are in agreement on. Maybe you are not perpetuating the(what I call myth) of first cycle experience. There are however an almost endless list of variables to what 'best' equates to: age,state of mind,what is expected,amount,time of cycle,sensitivity,compounds used etc.., To me,knowing that your first cycle is laways the best equals pretty much knowing what your genetic potential is! So many variables that for a person to REALLY know he would have to be under the strictess scientific controled study for a lengthy amount of years I hope (as I've tried ) to make myself clear on too many people reading the first cycle thing/shit and freaking that somehow they blew something that can never be fixed. This is just not the case.. Originally posted by Real1ty Whether you like it or not its a fact that the body gets used to things and its just not like the first time And I don't like it. This causes me to ever increase my xanax dosage to the point of going cold turkey just for me to be able to use them for sleep again. But with roids i don't believe it's the same with the growth aspect once the body returns to homeostasis and all things healthwise considered

I think this thread may be getting a little off-point with the original question but whatever.....I am all for quoting studies especially since I have done that often enough but there is also real-world experience.....I wonder how many here who have said that 10 mgs dbol is suppressive have actually had blood tests... and have actually done dbol bridges.....I have as a number of the guys that I lift with and there was insufficient interference with recovery such that would invalidate dbol as a bridge for maintaining gains during the off-cycle (assuming proper PCT) or due to liver values.... now I am not suggesting that different individuals many not react in varying degrees to any type of post-cycle bridging, it may be inappropriate for some, and there is disagreement as to whether to bridge at all, so if you want to experiment, which is what most of us do at one point or another, all I can suggest to you is try it and see if it works.....in my case it actually leans me out a little and helps me maintain my gains (real world) which may or not be the same for you.........As to the other issue.......when experienced AS users talk about your first cycle as being the best cycle it is only from the standpoint of your body's initial first-time reaction to AS, and that you usually need proportionally less AS to generate a specific level of muscle, and strength, not whether the initial cycle is more "effective" in terms of total strength increases or building mass as compared to later cycles which can certainly vary depending on the amount of AS used .....the parsing of words that I am hearing here on that subject is patently bullshit....save it for the yokels that you are trying to impress......don't do it here.....there is a big difference from trying to sound intelligent on an issue and actually knowing what the hell you are talking about.....sorry....the tren is making me a bit pissy today.....nevermind, I'm not sorry.....

Originally posted by DistantThunder I think this thread may be getting a little off-point with the original question but whatever.....I am all for quoting studies especially since I have done that often enough but there is also real-world experience.....I wonder how many here who have said that 10 mgs dbol is suppressive have actually had blood tests... and have actually done dbol bridges.....I have as a number of the guys that I lift with and there was insufficient interference with recovery such that would invalidate dbol as a bridge for maintaining gains during the off-cycle (assuming proper PCT) or due to liver values.... Yes, I have seen blood test in a clinical setting that will tell you the same thing every study done on exogenous hormones states, hormones suppress at very small doses. The idea that recovery won't be inhibited while using a suppressive substance during a time where the body is already suppressed shows how much thinking went into this "theory".