# EQ vs Primo ?



## Professorx (Mar 24, 2013)

Hi guys !

Just want to know if some guys here still use Primo ?


----------



## didless (Jul 12, 2009)

i don't due to the amount of fakes and even with ug labs i would be concerned as I've heard some ugh pass off masteron as primo.

plus you need 600mg min which is 6ml alone with out anything else.


----------



## oxy2000 (May 17, 2012)

primo all day long , although works out more expensive


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

Both pretty useless, with Primo being slightly less useless than EQ, but far more expensive.

Whatever you are hoping to achieve, there are better options.


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

Nytol said:


> Both pretty useless, with Primo being slightly less useless than EQ, but far more expensive.
> 
> Whatever you are hoping to achieve, there are better options.


What would you use instead of EQ as you don't seem to rate it?

Agree that Primo is useless these days though.


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

Chelsea said:


> What would you use instead of EQ as you don't seem to rate it?
> 
> Agree that Primo is useless these days though.


For what purpose would you want to use EQ, what benefits do you want from it?

Then I can suggest what I'd use to get those effects.

Primo is what it is, I'm talking about the chemical, not the availability of the genuine article, as it is about, however most is probably fake.

Most don't appreciate how similar it is to Masteron, esp not the women who seem to jump on it after reading on a forum that it is good to do so, and end up having to shave their upper lip, but that is another topic.


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

Nytol said:


> For what purpose would you want to use EQ, what benefits do you want from it?
> 
> Then I can suggest what I'd use to get those effects.
> 
> ...


Same as any AAS really mate, size and strength gains. Seems to be very low on sides even at high doses so always thought it was pretty useful.

Most things I hear about Primo are the same, hard to get the real stuff and its far better to use Masteron and given the choice that's what I would do.

I shave my upper lip already so im not too fussed about that


----------



## Professorx (Mar 24, 2013)

Nytol said:


> Both pretty useless, with Primo being slightly less useless than EQ, but far more expensive.
> 
> Whatever you are hoping to achieve, there are better options.


What better options mate ?


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

EQ is probably the only steroid to give me zero gains, yet it did mess with my head, so in that respect I consider it worse than useless.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who can honestly attribute much to EQ if they are honest.

People like to state that you can take a lot of it, but to me that is confirming that it is not very good, if you diluted a shot of vodka in a litre of water, would it make it a good drink because you could drink a lot of it without side effects?

To me, I compare every drug to Testosterone and ask what I'm hoping to get from it, that the same dose of Test will not give me.

Too many people just throw stuff in without really knowing why.

Adding small amounts of Nandrolone to Test can and in my experience does, improve gains over adding that much test alone.

So 600mg Test + 300mg Nandrolone is better than 900mg test.

With EQ 600mg Test + 300mg Boldenone = same as 600mg test, but wasted money and syringes.

If a person suffers with too much water on test then add in a small amount of an AI.

Oral dianabol is a very good drug, trenbolone is a very good drug if you can handle the side effects, even oral Winstrol beats Primo and EQ for effectiveness.

I only use Testosterone now, have done for years, and although I never mirrored the look I had when I was on tren, I beat all of my previous lifts, and was far less psychotic


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

If EQ doesn't give you any gains at all

Then other parts of the equation are out I.e diet


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

Professorx said:


> What better options mate ?


As above mate, Nandrolone, Trenbolone, Dianabol and Winstrol, (assuming Test is always used).

Or just more test, the most simple option that many over look as it is not 'exciting' or complicated enough.

1-2g of test will blow most stack out of the water.


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

marknorthumbria said:


> If EQ doesn't give you any gains at all
> 
> Then other parts of the equation are out I.e diet


My diet is consistent, and other drugs give me the gains they do, so if EQ gives me nothing, then it is the EQ that is the poor choice in the equation.


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

Nytol said:


> EQ is probably the only steroid to give me zero gains, yet it did mess with my head, so in that respect I consider it worse than useless.
> 
> I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who can honestly attribute much to EQ if they are honest.
> 
> ...


You know what mate I have never looked at it like that before but you're right if you can take high doses of it then it really cant be that great I suppose.

Agree with Dbol and Winnie although I find orals tend to hurt my appetite a bit which is annoying.

Tren is simply amazing I love the stuff, although the psychosis doesn't effect me too much unless im in the car and someone fcks me off haha.

Thanks for that though mate, was thinking off adding EQ into my next blast but I think I will leave it from now on as that makes complete sense to me :beer:


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Nytol said:


> My diet is consistent, and other drugs give me the gains they do, so if EQ gives me nothing, then it is the EQ that is the poor choice in the equation.


No..EQ is an anabolic compound, if it gives Zero gains (note the word i use to describe it) then something else is off, or the gear is. Yes there are stronger drugs which visually change you quicker, but EQ can grow you aswell


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

marknorthumbria said:


> No..EQ is an anabolic compound, if it gives Zero gains (note the word i use to describe it) then something else is off, or the gear is. Yes there are stronger drugs which visually change you quicker, but EQ can grow you aswell


OK, you are correct, my use of the word 'zero' was a poor one.

Let me clarify.

In the past I tried everything, out of curiosity as much as desire for physical gains. Many of those things are probably documented on here way, way back.

I would keep in a base of 600mg Test E, then add the new compound on top of it, to asses the effectiveness on strength, and lean tissue gains.

Boldenone in doses of up to 900mg per week did nothing above and beyond the 600mg of Test E.

I re run this experiment 3 times over the space of a couple of years, and each time the same result, so my conclusion was that boldenone gives zero gains above 600mg Test E alone.

If a person who have never used AAS before ran some boldenone then I imagine they may see something from it, (I'd actually be very interested in their results), but for people who are on other compounds, I feel it is so mild I class it as ineffective.

Even if a person were a mega responder to AAS, why choose a less effective drug when there are more effective options?


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

How long had you been on a full dose of AAS when adding in the EQ mate? And how long did u keep the EQ in for, 900mg is solid starting dose for EQ as its mild

I agree it's no androgen, and can't bind to the androgen receptor like tren but it has it's use in a long cycle, or can be used before adding in stronger compounds,


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

marknorthumbria said:


> How long had you been on a full dose of AAS when adding in the EQ mate? And how long did u keep the EQ in for, 900mg is solid starting dose for EQ as its mild
> 
> I agree it's no androgen, and can't bind to the androgen receptor like tren but it has it's use in a long cycle, or can be used before adding in stronger compounds,


A loooong time 

I probably kept it in for 10-12 weeks on each occasion.

Even for someone who had not used very much, (or anything), I still do not consider it a very useful compound.

Adding in an extra 100mg of test will likely be beneficial for most than the addition of 300mg Boldenone.

What do you consider Boldenone to be useful for, above say a smaller dose of a different compound?


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Nytol said:


> A loooong time
> 
> I probably kept it in for 10-12 weeks on each occasion.
> 
> ...


Did you not cruise at TRT dose before trying it? Say 8 weeks at 150mg e7-10days ? Sounds like you could have q little saturated receptors?

well when getting back on gear, I was told by my coach to use test + EQ first to get some growing out of those compounds, before

Adding in others, you could run a full

Cycle of test + EQ, then drop it and add in tren or npp and have a second wave of gains for example


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

marknorthumbria said:


> Did you not cruise at TRT dose before trying it? Say 8 weeks at 150mg e7-10days ? *Sounds like you could have q little saturated receptors*?
> 
> well when getting back on gear, I was told by my coach to use test + EQ first to get some growing out of those compounds, before
> 
> ...


As far as I was aware mate this was a myth.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Chelsea said:


> As far as I was aware mate this was a myth.


It has elements of truth saturated is perhaps the wrong word to describe,

But example if you pound 750mg test E for 40 weeks would you really see 40 weeks of gains


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

marknorthumbria said:


> It has elements of truth saturated is perhaps the wrong word to describe,
> 
> But example if you pound 750mg test E for 40 weeks would you really see 40 weeks of gains


Hmmm I don't think it has anything to do with receptors, I think if you stayed on that dose and constantly increased calories then you could get consistent gains, you would do even better if you increased the test dose and increased the cals.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Chelsea said:


> Hmmm I don't think it has anything to do with receptors, I think if you stayed on that dose and constantly increased calories then you could get consistent gains, you would do even better if you increased the test dose and increased the cals.


Gonna have a quick google now see If I can find out to back me up


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Chelsea said:


> Hmmm I don't think it has anything to do with receptors, I think if you stayed on that dose and constantly increased calories then you could get consistent gains, you would do even better if you increased the test dose and increased the cals.


Can't find anything solid so just respond without - saturation defonately the wrong word to describe but humor me

ok continually upping the dose upping calories yes it would continue but at what point to you reach a dose that becomes un utilised and floating around the body with nowhere to go other than play havoc with aromatisation, or dropping to a TRT level dose then continuing the Same dosage at the cycle before- which u think would be better over the timespan of a full year

Still googling cos iv seen something which explains what I'm tryin to say in the past,

The body loves change lol


----------



## Marshan (Aug 27, 2010)

Both overrated. EQ made me sleepy...primo...dont think it did a single recoognisable thing for me...ran both for ages to give them a fair chance. As for eating, I reckon ALL AAS will increase your appetite as well as good solid workouts. Materon with tren made me more vascular than I knew was possible.


----------



## geordie_paul (Aug 12, 2007)

Chelsea said:


> Hmmm I don't think it has anything to do with receptors, I think if you stayed on that dose and constantly increased calories then you could get consistent gains, you would do even better if you increased the test dose and increased the cals.


you would surely need to increase the dosage to get the same effect after gaining say 10 pound of muscle using a certain dose though?


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Chelsea said:


> Hmmm I don't think it has anything to do with receptors, I think if you stayed on that dose and constantly increased calories then you could get consistent gains, you would do even better if you increased the test dose and increased the cals.


ok mate ive got it this is what i was triyng to say, its not particularly the AR receptor which down regulates as high doses in modern studies actually show it up regulates it even after continuous use,

however AAS use so many other pathways, not only binding to the AR receptor, such as the activity of satellite cells, GH, IGF1,new myofiber formation

these do not respond in the same way as the AR and will not upregulate

When you increase the amount of anabolic hormones, catabolic hormones will rise as well. When the concentration of catabolic hormones is high enough growth is off set or even stops

does this come across better mate?


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

geordie_paul said:


> you would surely need to increase the dosage to get the same effect after gaining say 10 pound of muscle using a certain dose though?


see above


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

marknorthumbria said:


> Can't find anything solid so just respond without - saturation defonately the wrong word to describe but humor me
> 
> ok continually upping the dose upping calories yes it would continue but at what point to you reach a dose that becomes un utilised and floating around the body with nowhere to go other than play havoc with aromatisation, or dropping to a TRT level dose then continuing the Same dosage at the cycle before- which u think would be better over the timespan of a full year
> 
> ...


 :lol: I get what you're saying mate, don't get me wrong its not something I would do but logical thinking suggests that's what would occur. I would much rather blast and cruise.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Chelsea said:


> :lol: I get what you're saying mate, don't get me wrong its not something I would do but logical thinking suggests that's what would occur. I would much rather blast and cruise.


check my latest post mate explains what i was trying to say - continously upping the dose would lead to more catabolic hormones than anabolic - sending u backwards lol!


----------



## Marshan (Aug 27, 2010)

geordie_paul said:


> you would surely need to increase the dosage to get the same effect after gaining say 10 pound of muscle using a certain dose though?


DefinItely.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

mixerD1 said:


> DefinItely.


no you wouldnt if time of is given mate

calories would need to increase as would the weight your pushing


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

marknorthumbria said:


> ok mate ive got it this is what i was triyng to say, its not particularly the AR receptor which down regulates as high doses in modern studies actually show it up regulates it even after continuous use,
> 
> however AAS use so many other pathways, not only binding to the AR receptor, such as the activity of satellite cells, GH, IGF1,new myofiber formation
> 
> ...


My 1 question from this is that, don't steroids actually block the catabolic hormones in the body?


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Chelsea said:


> My 1 question from this is that, don't steroids actually block the catabolic hormones in the body?


they reduce recovery time by blocking the effects of stress hormone cortisol on muscle tissue, so that catabolism of muscle is greatly reduced

but thats not what that statement says mate, they can rise ( and there are more than just cortisol) but when high enough, they will off set growth


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

marknorthumbria said:


> they reduce recovery time by blocking the effects of stress hormone cortisol on muscle tissue, so that catabolism of muscle is greatly reduced
> 
> but thats not what that statement says mate, they can rise ( and there are more than just cortisol) but when high enough, they will off set growth


Not just Cortisol mate, they block the receptor sites of Cortisol and many others too so I don't get how high doses of AAS could actually increase the amount of catabolic hormones in the body when one of the jobs of AAS is to actually block them?

Makes no sense to me.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Chelsea said:


> Not just Cortisol mate, they block the receptor sites of Cortisol and many others too so I don't get how high doses of AAS could actually increase the amount of catabolic hormones in the body when one of the jobs of AAS is to actually block them?
> 
> Makes no sense to me.


the human body is not simple, every hormone is linked to another,

to divulge of to explain in a way i know more about.

arimidex lowers Estrogen, but your Estrogen directly effects prolactin

when you lower estrogen too much, you will raise prolactin

so those with gyno, using too much AI - will cause lactation,puffiness with too higher AI dose.


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

marknorthumbria said:


> the human body is not simple, every hormone is linked to another,
> 
> to divulge of to explain in a way i know more about.
> 
> ...


I don't think that really proves in any way what I was trying to say mate  you're right with the estrogen and prolactin though.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Chelsea said:


> I don't think that really proves in any way what I was trying to say mate  you're right with the estrogen and prolactin though.


cortisol's catabolic effect on the muscle is inhibited by AAS yes, but it doesnt stop the hormone from rising in the body, it has other pathways it can affect aswell as making muscle cells catabolic.

i was just refering to E2/prolactin to show other ways in they indirectly affect each other

but ok mate will just leave it as i dont have the knowledge to back up what im trying to say in enough of a way to convince you


----------



## Marshan (Aug 27, 2010)

marknorthumbria said:


> no you wouldnt if time of is given mate
> 
> calories would need to increase as would the weight your pushing


True about time off in between but that wasn't mentioned beforehand.


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

marknorthumbria said:


> cortisol's catabolic effect on the muscle is inhibited by AAS yes, but it doesnt stop the hormone from rising in the body, it has other pathways it can affect aswell as making muscle cells catabolic.
> 
> i was just refering to E2/prolactin to show other ways in they indirectly affect each other
> 
> but ok mate will just leave it as i dont have the knowledge to back up what im trying to say in enough of a way to convince you


Fair play mate, but cortisol is not just inhibited or lowered, from what I can see AAS usage blocks the receptor sites of the catabolic hormones so even if it has different pathways it still cant bind as the receptor sites are blocked.


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

Chelsea said:


> As far as I was aware mate this was a myth.


It is a total myth.



marknorthumbria said:


> The body loves change lol


The body actually loves homeostasis, which is why growing is such a bitch 

In regards to your other post, yes maybe if I'd come off of everything for a year then tried EQ it may have 'worked' but that is not the point behind anything I said.

If something is good and useful, you should not have to do anything to make it work, it just would, and EQ does not, (to any worthwhile degree).


----------



## Hotdog147 (Oct 15, 2011)

Real life experiences are enough to show that the body can't constantly gain, staying on high dose AAS doesn't work really, it's certainly not worth the health risks and the gains(little of!!!) wouldn't be worth the risk

Not being a c unt here but just look at ausbuilt as an example! Massive doses for what, 2 plus years? Haven't seen him recently but with those doses and the amount of food and training he was doing certainly helps the point @marknorthumbria is trying to make! lol


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Nytol said:


> It is a total myth


not read the post where I put what I meant to say over AR saturation which yes is incorrect,shouldnt have wrote that; but

more to do with GH,IGF1, and other cell pathways becoming dull

dont need to come of everything for a year, just throw a TRT cruise in? if its something your not doing maybe look into it many benefits, mainly on the organs. most people use way to high of a cruise dose and its pointless


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Hotdog147 said:


> Real life experiences are enough to show that the body can't constantly gain, staying on high dose AAS doesn't work really, it's certainly not worth the health risks and the gains(little of!!!) wouldn't be worth the risk
> 
> Not being a c unt here but just look at ausbuilt as an example! Massive doses for what, 2 plus years? Haven't seen him recently but with those doses and the amount of food and training he was doing certainly helps the point @marknorthumbria is trying to make! lol


i still speak to ausbuilt now mate, He is with JP

JP has CONSIDERABLY lowered his doses.. hes using 1.5g total of gear now lol


----------



## Bull Terrier (May 14, 2012)

marknorthumbria said:


> i still speak to ausbuilt now mate, He is with JP
> 
> JP has CONSIDERABLY lowered his doses.. hes using 1.5g total of gear now lol


JP - Jordan Peters?


----------



## Hotdog147 (Oct 15, 2011)

marknorthumbria said:


> i still speak to ausbuilt now mate, He is with JP
> 
> JP has CONSIDERABLY lowered his doses.. hes using 1.5g total of gear now lol


That's good to hear!

Back on topic..... I actually like EQ :lol:

It's all personal preference, we all react differently to these hormones, if you tried it and don't like it, fine, don't use it.... But someone else may react totally different to you on it

Primo, never tried, probably never will. Cost is stupid high and as said, chances of getting legit stuff are probably slim, same with tren hex!


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Chelsea said:


> Fair play mate, but cortisol is not just inhibited or lowered, from what I can see AAS usage blocks the receptor sites of the catabolic hormones so even if it has different pathways it still cant bind as the receptor sites are blocked.


high doses of AAS block cortisol receptors and are thus anti-catabolic. But if this were an adequate explanation, then one could use anti-cortisol drugs together with low doses of AAS and get the same results as with high doses of AAS. This isn't the case. In fact, if cortisol is suppressed, this simply results in painful joint problems. And if the cortisol-blocking theory were true, we also would expect that persons with abnormally low cortisol ought to be quite muscular. That isn't the case either.

- all is not as simple as a one explanation statement mate is what im trying to get across


----------



## Marshan (Aug 27, 2010)

marknorthumbria said:


> i still speak to ausbuilt now mate, He is with JP
> 
> JP has CONSIDERABLY lowered his doses.. hes using 1.5g total of gear now lol


Put it straight now to be fair...Aus was cutting for a comp. Not the same type of protocols at all, of course hes gonna be on way less gear.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

mixerD1 said:


> Put it straight now to be fair...Aus was cutting for a comp. Not the same type of protocols at all, of course hes gonna be on way less gear.


This was a few months ago before he had begun real prep.. it was 1000test 500 npp..hardly prep compounds.

I imagine the closer to prep he gets the more DHT+AR compounds that go in and at probably higher doses as calories are cut


----------



## Marshan (Aug 27, 2010)

Hotdog147 said:


> Real life experiences are enough to show that the body can't constantly gain, staying on high dose AAS doesn't work really, it's certainly not worth the health risks and the gains(little of!!!) wouldn't be worth the risk
> 
> Not being a c unt here but just look at ausbuilt as an example! Massive doses for what, 2 plus years? Haven't seen him recently but with those doses and the amount of food and training he was doing certainly helps the point @marknorthumbria is trying to make! lol


Definitely cant agree...I was running over a gram of t400 and Oxys for a few months and just kept on growing...FWIW Aus was massive at his biggest.


----------



## Lawrence 82 (Jun 1, 2012)

if EQ was beyond useless no1 would buy it, n labs wouldnt make it!!


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

mixerD1 said:


> Definitely cant agree...I was running over a gram of t400 and Oxys for a few months and just kept on growing...FWIW Aus was massive at his biggest.


a few months (3) is an acceptable cycle length, were talking high doses for longer than that... no wonder u kept growing with those oxies, how much was muscle


----------



## Hotdog147 (Oct 15, 2011)

mixerD1 said:


> Definitely cant agree...I was running over a gram of t400 and Oxys for a few months and just kept on growing...FWIW Aus was massive at his biggest.


A few months as in 12 weeks ish!?

Not really what I was getting at tbf


----------



## Marshan (Aug 27, 2010)

marknorthumbria said:


> This was a few months ago before he had begun real prep.. it was 1000test 500 npp..hardly prep compounds.
> 
> I imagine the closer to prep he gets the more DHT+AR compounds that go in and at probably higher doses as calories are cut


1000 mgs of test and 500 mgs NPP a\rent huge amounts, sorry. Anyway...dht and ARs arent that much depending on whose protocol you run but I cant see them being hugely different...its more the variety than the quantity.


----------



## Marshan (Aug 27, 2010)

Hotdog147 said:


> A few months as in 12 weeks ish!?
> 
> Not really what I was getting at tbf


6 months.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Hotdog147 said:


> A few months as in 12 weeks ish!?
> 
> Not really what I was getting at tbf


will u fvking change ur avatar


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

marknorthumbria said:


> high doses of AAS block cortisol receptors and are thus anti-catabolic. But if this were an adequate explanation, then one could use anti-cortisol drugs together with low doses of AAS and get the same results as with high doses of AAS. This isn't the case. In fact, if cortisol is suppressed, this simply results in painful joint problems. And if the cortisol-blocking theory were true, we also would expect that persons with abnormally low cortisol ought to be quite muscular. That isn't the case either.
> 
> - all is not as simple as a one explanation statement mate is what im trying to get across


I disagree mate sometimes it is the simple answer that is the correct one.

Mate..... maybe the drugs used to lower Cortisol levels come with many side effects and therefore the wise decision would be just to use AAS and not bother with those, plus there are many other benefits with regards to AAS use which are not just anti catabolic related so I don't think your method would elicit the same results.

Also if a person with abnormally low cortisol levels didn't train and didn't have a healthy diet would they still be muscular? As we all know there is much more to muscle development than cortisol control mate. I feel like we are getting more into assumptions than actual fact mate.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

mixerD1 said:


> 1000 mgs of test and 500 mgs NPP a\rent huge amounts, sorry. Anyway...dht and ARs arent that much depending on whose protocol you run but I cant see them being hugely different...its more the variety than the quantity.


i said they were lowered and were not huge amounts though mate? in comparison to what he was using it is a fraction lol

i dont quite get what you mean by the second half mate


----------



## Hotdog147 (Oct 15, 2011)

mixerD1 said:


> 6 months.


Pleased for you 



marknorthumbria said:


> will u fvking change ur avatar


 :lol:

Don't you like it!?


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Chelsea said:


> I disagree mate sometimes it is the simple answer that is the correct one.
> 
> Mate..... maybe the drugs used to lower Cortisol levels come with many side effects and therefore the wise decision would be just to use AAS and not bother with those, plus there are many other benefits with regards to AAS use which are not just anti catabolic related so I don't think your method would elicit the same results.
> 
> Also if a person with abnormally low cortisol levels didn't train and didn't have a healthy diet would they still be muscular? As we all know there is much more to muscle development than cortisol control mate. I feel like we are getting more into assumptions than actual fact mate.


take what i wrote there with no real merit in real world application but its just a statement which explains what i was trying to put across in the fact that the human body, nothing is simple lol.

right lets this time really leave it and i wont quote you anymore cos i like you n dont want you to have bad thoughts of me :wub:


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

marknorthumbria said:


> take what i wrote there with no real merit in real world application but its just a statement which explains what i was trying to put across in the fact that the human body, nothing is simple lol.
> 
> right lets this time really leave it and i wont quote you anymore cos *i like you n dont want you to have bad thoughts of me * :wub:


Only bad sexual ones so you're fine :lol:


----------



## Marshan (Aug 27, 2010)

marknorthumbria said:


> i said they were lowered and were not huge amounts though mate? in comparison to what he was using it is a fraction lol
> 
> i dont quite get what you mean by the second half mate


I meant, with the androgens...you wouldnt be running large amounts of anything,but you might run winny ana primo masteron and proviron. So youve 5 dht based compounds but in relatively small quantities.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

mixerD1 said:


> I meant, with the androgens...you wouldnt be running large amounts of anything,but you might run winny ana primo masteron and proviron. So youve 5 dht based compounds but in relatively small quantities.


yar but bet the total of all those little compounds add up higher then his test/npp growth cycle ?


----------



## Marshan (Aug 27, 2010)

marknorthumbria said:


> will u fvking change ur avatar


Haha....it causes a bit of a twitch in the eye alright Hotdog.


----------



## Marshan (Aug 27, 2010)

marknorthumbria said:


> yar but bet the total of all those little compounds add up higher then his test/npp growth cycle ?


They more than likely would, but theyre not anabolic.


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

Lawrence 82 said:


> if EQ was beyond useless no1 would buy it, n labs wouldnt make it!!


You are failing to consider that most people do not actually think for themselves before doing things, and that will include the majority of people on boards like this one.

Look at the amount of totally useless $hit advertised and bought in the real world, because some one, who knows someone says it is good, or it has a nice shiny wrapper or a new name.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

mixerD1 said:


> They more than likely would, but theyre not anabolic.


sorry but correct me if im wrong but they are

DHT-derived family of anabolic steroid derivatives and analogue.

all those compounds have 'anabolic ratings' as does npp have anabolic:androgenic rating


----------



## Marshan (Aug 27, 2010)

marknorthumbria said:


> sorry but correct me if im wrong but they are
> 
> DHT-derived family of anabolic steroid derivatives and analogue.
> 
> all those compounds have 'anabolic ratings' as does npp have anabolic:androgenic rating


Well, to be sarcastic about it, go on a cycle of masteron primo anavar winny and proviron purely for bulking and let me know how it goes for you.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

mixerD1 said:


> Well, to be sarcastic about it, go on a cycle of masteron primo anavar winny and proviron purely for bulking and let me know how it goes for you.


id didnt say they were strong on the anabolic rating,

but aslong as test is in there, possibly EQ. illl grow just fine


----------



## Lawrence 82 (Jun 1, 2012)

Nytol said:


> You are failing to consider that most people do not actually think for themselves before doing things, and that will include the majority of people on boards like this one.
> 
> Look at the amount of totally useless $hit advertised and bought in the real world, because some one, who knows someone says it is good, or it has a nice shiny wrapper or a new name.


maybe for a certain time period, but eq has been around for years, surely people would have cottoned on by now, prob why labs dont produce primo cus the user knows you have to jab loads of oil to get an effect.


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

marknorthumbria said:


> not read the post where I put what I meant to say over AR saturation which yes is incorrect,shouldnt have wrote that; but
> 
> more to do with GH,IGF1, and other cell pathways becoming dull
> 
> dont need to come of everything for a year, just throw a TRT cruise in? if its something your not doing maybe look into it many benefits, mainly on the organs. most people use way to high of a cruise dose and its pointless


The above has nothing to do with why EQ is a poor drug compared to Nandrolone or trenbolone etc

Mate, I've been there, done it, and got the T shirt when it comes to AAS use, as many of the old timers on here can attest to, 

But now I use far less, and only testosterone, everything else either gives me psychological side effects, or works to such a small degree that it is not worth the effort to stick it in or swallow it.

As for the 'organs' which in particular like EQ 

I had a full, ridiculously expensive medical at the beginning of the year, full blood work, full cardiologist work up, ECG, Echocardiogram, Stress test, etc.

The result of much steroid abuse, (yes, I admit it was abusive at times), and being on pretty much constantly for well over 10yrs...

No health issues at all, not a single one.

I do agree on the low cruise dose, as the body will get used to it, as it will anything.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Nytol said:


> The above has nothing to do with why EQ is a poor drug compared to Nandrolone or trenbolone etc
> 
> Mate, I've been there, done it, and got the T shirt when it comes to AAS use, as many of the old timers on here can attest to,
> 
> ...


nah it doesnt relate to that mate, they are such different compounds i would not compare them.

good stuff your all ok after long usage

stories like that leaves me feeling better about making the decision to blast n cruise


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

Lawrence 82 said:


> maybe for a certain time period, but eq has been around for years, surely people would have cottoned on by now, prob why labs dont produce primo cus the user knows you have to jab loads of oil to get an effect.


People generally don't cotton on, or learn from other people.

I have had this discussion about EQ, on this very board, more times than I can remember, yet here I am having it again 

The next generation read the same old $hit the ones before did, go through the same cycles, and ultimately come to the same conclusions.

Mg per Mg, Primo is more potent than EQ, labs don't produce it because the raw chemical is expensive, yet end users only want to pay a certain amount for their gear, meaning there is less profit in it.

The fact it is expensive is the only thing that keeps it alive IMO, the allure of 'if it costs a lot it must be good', like buying a £100 Armani T shirt that was made for 50p in Bangladesh.

If they sold it for £1, not many would buy it, as it has no psychological value.


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

marknorthumbria said:


> stories like that leaves me feeling better about making the decision to blast n cruise


Staying on is far less stressful to your system than keep coming off for short periods of time.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Nytol said:


> Staying on is far less stressful to your system than keep coming off for short periods of time.


i used to stay of for long enough for it to be worth it mate however i cant go through another shutdown from tren again,

the most recent one broke me lol


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

marknorthumbria said:


> i used to stay of for long enough for it to be worth it mate however i cant go through another shutdown from tren again,
> 
> the most recent one broke me lol


Tren seems to elicit the feeling of being shut down, even when test is continued, so to stop everything after a tren cycle must be very unpleasant.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Nytol said:


> Tren seems to elicit the feeling of being shut down, even when test is continued, so to stop everything after a tren cycle must be very unpleasant.


i had multiple blood tests coming of mate, my LH,FSH were undetectable even with the use of HCG on cycle , took about 10 weeks to come around,

i had continued test only for the last month just to try let as many androgens clear as possible,


----------



## Marshan (Aug 27, 2010)

marknorthumbria said:


> i used to stay of for long enough for it to be worth it mate however i cant go through another shutdown from tren again,
> 
> the most recent one broke me lol


Jesus...on the same page as you there dude...was on ace there for a good while..looked awesome, felt terrible. Proviron was only a pysspoor version of help. Perfectly put, felt broken at the tailend of it...starting to show recovery now...thank the lord, and Im not religious.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

mixerD1 said:


> Jesus...on the same page as you there dude...was on ace there for a good while..looked awesome, felt terrible. Proviron was only a pysspoor version of help. Perfectly put, felt broken at the tailend of it...starting to show recovery now...thank the lord, and Im not religious.


people underestimate how long tren hangs around after jabbing, enanthate is hurrendous

i feel like a god on tren ace lol


----------



## Marshan (Aug 27, 2010)

marknorthumbria said:


> people underestimate how long tren hangs around after jabbing, enanthate is hurrendous
> 
> i feel like a god on tren ace lol


Ran para in low-ish numbers for about 6 months, maybe 2 shots a week being cautious..was never too bad...ran ace every second or third day in a prep. Sweet baby Lucifer...felt and looked great especially when I ran mast with it...then the inevitable happened. No sexdrive. I could do everything, I just didnt feel as if I wanted to. Never again. Truly brilliant steroid, if you dont care about not having sex.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

mixerD1 said:


> Ran para in low-ish numbers for about 6 months, maybe 2 shots a week being cautious..was never too bad...ran ace every second or third day in a prep. Sweet baby Lucifer...felt and looked great especially when I ran mast with it...then the inevitable happened. No sexdrive. I could do everything, I just didnt feel as if I wanted to. Never again. Truly brilliant steroid, if you dont care about not having sex.


whoa mate, your backwards to me?

Im practically a rapist on tren ace...doesnt even have to be alive


----------



## Marshan (Aug 27, 2010)

marknorthumbria said:


> whoa mate, your backwards to me?
> 
> Im practically a rapist on tren ace...doesnt even have to be alive


I cant fathom it...never never had an issue like this. But as I said it was towards the tail end of a prep..had dropped test a few weeks before and then nothing. Could do the job but had no interest in it. Almost 100% again now...like yerself, it doesnt have to even be alive..but was very depressed abt it there for a while. Ability or inability to do the job is one thing, but not wanting to do it is totally another. It's behind me thank f**k.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

you ran tren without test? jesus christ mate i am not surprised, just chop it of. its useless to you now lol


----------



## Marshan (Aug 27, 2010)

marknorthumbria said:


> you ran tren without test? jesus christ mate i am not surprised, just chop it of. its useless to you now lol


For the last 2 weeks of a prep...purely to eliminate water. Cant say it was hugely effective and TBH I probably added to the whole thing worrying if it was a good idea at all to do it.


----------



## Professorx (Mar 24, 2013)

Omg, didnt think my thread would provoke so many replies !

Ok so, very interesting opinions guys ! Im agree with you Nytol but EQ is still a vet and strong aas. I like EQ for cardio enhancement and collagen synthetis, I like it cause its soft.

Deca is good too but I have bad reactions with it : violent tingling. Dont understand why but its horrible.

Tren is very good too with more tren than test, but I dont react much anymore.

Im ok with you Nytol, Dbol is a very very potent drug. I had very good results with winny but it kill joints. I never tried Mast.


----------



## Archaic (Mar 8, 2010)

@Nytol I've read quite a few of your posts over the years and like your posting style mate. You speak from personal tried/tested experience and allot of your conclusions echo my own. Good to see someone that's been round the block that doesn't rely on study copy/pastes like some on here too...

As for EQ guys, I've ran it a few times and any less than 1000mg ran for any less than 14wks is a waste of money and tissue trauma IME. More beneficial when ran upto 18-20wks IMO, but It's not a compound I'd stack again tbh, Nandrolone is a much superior alternative IMO.

Although, I did have a rare 20ml vial of WC EquiTren when they first trailed it, 500mg EQ/300mg Tren E per ml and that was a very productive blast, much more so than my previous Test/Tren blasts alone.


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

Archaic said:


> @Nytol I've read quite a few of your posts over the years and like your posting style mate. You speak from personal tried/tested experience and allot of your conclusions echo my own.


You are clearly a man of extreme intellect


----------



## Archaic (Mar 8, 2010)

Nytol said:


> You are clearly a man of extreme intellect


We'll yah, that goes without saying.. 

Don't mean to go off topic, but have to agree with the guys here that have negative issues with Tren too..

It's probably the best AAS out there for the physical changes it allows your body to achieve, but I can't run it anymore due to sides. The last time I ran it I honestly thought I'd end up doing life for carrying out the psychopathic thoughts I was having on a daily basis, and I also ended up on sleeping tablets after going 72hrs with zero sleep at one point.

Sounds crazy, but I must have convinced myself that Tren was not to blame and I was fine because I kept on running it for 7wks after sides first started... By that time I was dependant on the sleepers and it took me half a year to eventually get off them.


----------



## Tinytom (Sep 16, 2005)

I hate EQ. Totally sh!t compared to deca or NPP which is my personal favourite.

I've ran EQ at twice the dose of Deca in an experiment similar to Nytols and got not nearly as much as I did from other compounds combined with test.

In my experience black guys tend to get more out of it or like it more whichever is the truth.

I just found it a 'dirty' drug to use. Got more skin problems with it than Tren.

Masteron is a better drug than Primo and as they are both basically DHT based drugs Masteron would be my choice over the two. I've ran a test Tren Masteron course with Dbol for a good lean mass course several times.


----------



## mattc1991 (Jan 2, 2012)

marknorthumbria said:


> people underestimate how long tren hangs around after jabbing, enanthate is hurrendous
> 
> i feel like a god on tren ace lol


Hey man, ive been cruising on testE 250mg e10d for a while now, plan to come off after New Years, added tri-tren about 2 weeks ago and was going to run it up to mid dec, was going to move onto just Enanthate, recon I should ditch the enanthate and stick to Ace so it clears quicker?

Cheers man


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

Archaic said:


> It's probably the best AAS out there for the physical changes it allows your body to achieve, but I can't run it anymore due to sides. *The last time I ran it I honestly thought I'd end up doing life for carrying out the psychopathic thoughts I was having on a daily basis*, and I also ended up on sleeping tablets after going 72hrs with zero sleep at one point.
> 
> Sounds crazy, but I must have convinced myself that Tren was not to blame and I was fine because I kept on running it for 7wks after sides first started... By that time I was dependant on the sleepers and it took me half a year to eventually get off them.


Hmmm, sounds familiar 

I never had any sleep disturbances, or physical sides from it though.

It's amazing how convincingly we lie to ourselves.

To me this is the biggest danger from tren, people using it who are not self aware enough to realise, or accept the psychological changes it is causing, potentially leading them to do something which has a lasting negative effect on their life.


----------



## Tinytom (Sep 16, 2005)

Nytol said:


> Hmmm, sounds familiar
> 
> I never had any sleep disturbances, or physical sides from it though.
> 
> ...


A guy glassed me blindside for no reason while I was working the doors.

Unfortunately I was using Tren at the time.

My radio got broken. Coincidentally he also had some marks on his head.

It negatively affected my life cos I'm pretty sure I ripped my shoulder tendon performing a hammer action with radio. 100 times.

I needed surgery on my shoulder afterwards.

Bad times.


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

I remember the radio incident 

But Tren or not, that kind of behaviour needs to be returned in kind with a hefty dose of face stamping.


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

mattc1991 said:


> Hey man, ive been cruising on testE 250mg e10d for a while now, plan to come off after New Years, added tri-tren about 2 weeks ago and was going to run it up to mid dec, was going to move onto just Enanthate, recon I should ditch the enanthate and stick to Ace so it clears quicker?
> 
> Cheers man


worst idea ever, did you not listen to mixerD1 lol, tren in the system without test = shutdown beyond belief


----------



## mattc1991 (Jan 2, 2012)

marknorthumbria said:


> worst idea ever, did you not listen to mixerD1 lol, tren in the system without test = shutdown beyond belief


I actually feel great? Been using HCG for a while also, sex drive is thru the roof?!

Fat is falling off, and gaining muscle/strength.

250mg Pharma test E e10d

ROHM Tri-tren 150 e2.5d


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

mattc1991 said:


> I actually feel great? Been using HCG for a while also, sex drive is thru the roof?!
> 
> Fat is falling off, and gaining muscle/strength.
> 
> ...


Well you are using test there mate you said you weren't?


----------



## mattc1991 (Jan 2, 2012)

marknorthumbria said:


> Well you are using test there mate you said you weren't?


Sorry man, maybe the way I worded it.

So do you think I should ditch the tren enanthate n just run tren ace until mid December, as I'm discontinuing test start of January n going natty, so don't want the tren to **** me up post cycle


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

mattc1991 said:


> Sorry man, maybe the way I worded it.
> 
> So do you think I should ditch the tren enanthate n just run tren ace until mid December, as I'm discontinuing test start of January n going natty, so don't want the tren to **** me up post cycle


unsure mate could only answer from a personal level but if you want to hear thaat - tren ace is my favourite drug, in my eyes is far superior than enanthate, unsure exactly why - just experience from using a few different labs of both esters.

I would always use ace - regardless - I also continue test alone for a few weeks after tren to try let as many androgens clear as possible before coming of, swapping to prop is also viable as you can run it while your long esters clear


----------



## mattc1991 (Jan 2, 2012)

marknorthumbria said:


> unsure mate could only answer from a personal level but if you want to hear thaat - tren ace is my favourite drug, in my eyes is far superior than enanthate, unsure exactly why - just experience from using a few different labs of both esters.
> 
> I would always use ace - regardless - I also continue test alone for a few weeks after tren to try let as many androgens clear as possible before coming of, swapping to prop is also viable as you can run it while your long esters clear


Thanks man, appreciate advice.

Think I will not open this enanthate n buy afew vials of ace. What's your preferred dosage out of curiosity?


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

mattc1991 said:


> Thanks man, appreciate advice.
> 
> Think I will not open this enanthate n buy afew vials of ace. What's your preferred dosage out of curiosity?


if going for low test high tren then 2ml EOD,

i am running medium test medium tren at the moment and using 1.5ml EOD

I have used 1ml EOD and found it to be just as effective with medium/high test -

find ur sweet spot it is a strong drug


----------



## mattc1991 (Jan 2, 2012)

marknorthumbria said:


> if going for low test high tren then 2ml EOD,
> 
> i am running medium test medium tren at the moment and using 1.5ml EOD
> 
> ...


Think al try 1.5 n see how that works first. Cheers mate


----------



## Lawrence 82 (Jun 1, 2012)

this threads upsets me!!!! as i receive my stash of eq n think "is that actually gunna do anything" cheers fellas:whistling:


----------



## marknorthumbria (Oct 1, 2009)

Lawrence 82 said:


> this threads upsets me!!!! as i receive my stash of eq n think "is that actually gunna do anything" cheers fellas:whistling:


dont let the thread waste your gear,

what works for one doesnt work for another, visa versa

pin it and see lol


----------



## Lawrence 82 (Jun 1, 2012)

marknorthumbria said:


> dont let the thread waste your gear,
> 
> what works for one doesnt work for another, visa versa
> 
> pin it and see lol


i know pal was just playing, got 3ml of some new stuff in my glute been on eq for 8 weeks

6 more to go


----------



## Thunder99 (Jul 25, 2013)

Has anyone run primo for longer than 16 weeks at a gram/week?

I've heard of other people running it at high dose for far longer and say its one of the best compounds they have used.

maybe it is not for people who "cycle"?

perhaps it is best suited for those that arent scared to run compounds for up to a year at a time?

just a thought.


----------



## infernal0988 (Jun 16, 2011)

Nytol said:


> EQ is probably the only steroid to give me zero gains, yet it did mess with my head, so in that respect I consider it worse than useless.
> 
> I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who can honestly attribute much to EQ if they are honest.
> 
> ...


I disagree primobolan can be used in comp prep to maintain muscle along with other AAS, as i see it as it give Zero water retention & EQ is a good drug imo it varies from person to person.


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

infernal0988 said:


> I disagree primobolan can be used in comp prep to maintain muscle *along with other AAS*, as i see it as it give Zero water retention & EQ is a good drug imo it varies from person to person.


So can a ml of plain oil, but it does not mean it is going to bring anything additional to the party.


----------



## infernal0988 (Jun 16, 2011)

Nytol said:


> So can a ml of plain oil, but it does not mean it is going to bring anything additional to the party.


Thats your experience with it & i`m sure you have loads of others who have the same experience, but for every person who has had that experience there are others that have a different experience.


----------



## theBEAST2002 (Oct 16, 2011)

If you have a vagina the primo is great. For those with a d1ck then EQ is hands down better.


----------



## theBEAST2002 (Oct 16, 2011)

theBEAST2002 said:


> If you have a vagina the primo is great. For those with a d1ck then EQ is hands down better.


Come to think of it i recall a female bodybuilder on here stating she rates EQ over deca and primo for quality gains.


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

theBEAST2002 said:


> If you have a vagina the primo is great. For those with a d1ck then EQ is hands down better.


No, it is not.

Unless as a vagina possessor you want to start shaving your top lip.

Primo is very similar in structure to Masteron, I in fact found it more potent than Masteron on a mg for mg basis, but no body bothers to look at these things, they just rehash the same old $hit posted by the ill informed $hit poster before them.

No offence to you personally, but the amount of misinformation with no basis bounded about on this and other boards really p1sses me off, as everyone has the internet now, a world of information at their fingertips, and could do some actual research.


----------



## Tinytom (Sep 16, 2005)

After reading up more on primo and mast I don't know why people use primo which is very expensive over Masteron.

Like Nytol says both similar as DHT based.


----------



## Thunder99 (Jul 25, 2013)

So basically everyone in the thread uses chitty sources that sell them masteron as primo.

ok then.


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

ThunderKunt99 said:


> So basically everyone in the thread uses chitty sources that sell them masteron as primo.
> 
> ok then.


You clearly have trouble with your comprehension, have another read, or start with something easier and work your way up.


----------



## theBEAST2002 (Oct 16, 2011)

Nytol said:


> No, it is not.
> 
> Unless as a vagina possessor you want to start shaving your top lip.
> 
> ...


Just because they are both DHT's don't think for one minute that primo is even in the same league as mast. Mast hands down is *FAR* more potent as is EQ. I would rather take 600mg of EQ for 20 weeks then 1g of primo per week for 20 weeks.

Also i have used more or less all the major AAS bar primo. My missus loves it like anavar due to the fact that it's *very* mild. Which means i won't like it as i like my AAS to have some balls to them.


----------



## theBEAST2002 (Oct 16, 2011)

ThunderKunt99 said:


> So basically everyone in the thread uses chitty sources that sell them masteron as primo.
> 
> ok then.


I think if we got masteron instead of primo the reputation of primo will increase unnecessarily.


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

theBEAST2002 said:


> Just because they are both DHT's don't think for one minute that primo is even in the same league as mast. Mast hands down is *FAR* more potent as is EQ. I would rather take 600mg of EQ for 20 weeks then 1g of primo per week for 20 weeks.
> 
> Also i have used more or less all the major AAS bar primo. My missus loves it like anavar due to the fact that it's *very* mild. Which means i won't like it as i like my AAS to have some balls to them.


So you are telling me, quite aggressively, not to 'think for one minute' about something you have never personally used?

Well I *have* used everything, and am pretty confident in my subject, so we can agree to disagree


----------



## Hotdog147 (Oct 15, 2011)

theBEAST2002 said:


> Just because they are both DHT's don't think for one minute that primo is even in the same league as mast. Mast hands down is *FAR* more potent as is EQ. I would rather take 600mg of EQ for 20 weeks then 1g of primo per week for 20 weeks.
> 
> Also i have used more or less all the major AAS bar primo. My missus loves it like anavar due to the fact that it's *very* mild. Which means i won't like it as i like my AAS to have some balls to them.


Lol. How can you say that when you haven't even used it!?


----------



## theBEAST2002 (Oct 16, 2011)

Nytol said:


> So you are telling me, quite aggressively, not to 'think for one minute' about something you have never personally used?
> 
> Well I *have* used everything, and am pretty confident in my subject, so we can agree to disagree


I can agree to that.


----------



## theBEAST2002 (Oct 16, 2011)

Hotdog147 said:


> Lol. How can you say that when you haven't even used it!?


Try rereading the second sentence of the second paragraph.


----------

