• 👋Hello, please SIGN-UP FOR A FREE account and become a member of our community!
    You will then be able to start threads, post comments and send messages to other members. Thanks!
  • 💪Check Out IronMag Labs Andro Hard® - Powered by R-Andro & Epi-Andro! 💊
  • 👉Check Out Platinum Pharms🌽Corn Hole Sale!🌽

Proviron affect on total test

gdawg

gdawg

Low Life
Registered
Joined
Nov 13, 2014
Messages
4,423
Reaction score
232
Points
63
Location
Southeast
Get Shredded!
A couple of months I was running the Test E 500 . Half way in I decided to get bloods and my total test came back low around 2700 at 1 G weekly . I was disappointed in this and decided to send a vial to Simec for testing and finish off my cycle with Test C 250 . When I got the those results there was another curve ball , It came back at 507 mg/ml . WTF . I spoke with Dannie and he seemed to think the Proviron was causing the drop.

This is what was discussed with Dannie below.
Dannie said:
As per Shalender Bhasin's study 'Testosterone dose-response relationships in healthy young men' (commonly refereed as 'HeavyIron Testing protocol') passing results for 600mg Test E were 2370 ng/dL ± 150, blood drawn at week 16 of the treatment, obtained 1 wk after last testosterone injection.
Source: http://ajpendo.physiology.org/content/281/6/E1172

Gdawg's protocol can't be dismissed, its the protocol he used in the past. As long as pin frequency and time of blood test stays constant results can be compared against each other and used as a guide. During his cruise, results came back at 1386ng/dL on 306.25mg ew of Pharmacom Test C 250mg/ml (0.7ml pinned E4D), with blood drawn 4 days after last pin.

This time round same protocol was followed. 1000mg ew of Parmacom's Test E 500mg/ml tested at 2709ng/dL. Sadly dose taken vs Total Test isn't a linear relationship, but we would expect to see results of around 4000ng/dL on that dose. 2709ng/dL is a respectable number for 500-600mg ew, when tested 4 days after last pin.

Gdawg, can you please send 1 vial for lab analysis as per basic's request?

Proviron would not increase Total Test, only Free Test. But thank you for bringing that up, the theory I've formed a while ago after looking over some bloodwork of people on Proviron was that it indeed lowers Total Test number. My logical explanation is that despite the name Total Test is not an absolute value, Provion helps release more Free Test from Total Test, hence the lower Total Test reading.
This is just my theory and labs need to be run to prove it, perhaps for the next cruise I will provide Gdawg with some Proviron, if he is willing to test my theory.
...
Click to expand...



Folllowing this same protocol on cruise but adding 75 mg of Proviron my total test came back at 871 . Unfortunately I did not get results for free test .

In conclusion Dannie calls it again
 
Last edited by a moderator:
franchise24 said:
Maybe it's all subjective. I ran their test cyp 250 at 600mgs a week with 50mgs Bayer proviron and my total test was 2800+
Click to expand...
What was the protocol? Also any chance you have bottles from the same lot? I'd like to see if they are from the same batch as mine .
 
Provi shouldnt effect TT. Honestly im alittle skeptical of Simec all round. You planning on doing follow up labs Gdawg?
 
velociraptor44 said:
Provi shouldnt effect TT. Honestly im alittle skeptical of Simec all round. You planning on doing follow up labs Gdawg?
Click to expand...

Do you think they're forging results at the behest of source companies? It's not impossible but seems a little far out.

I'm not sure about the Free T vs. Total T idea... In theory the "Total" should include all of: free T, lightly-bound T (albumin), and tightly-bound (SHBG).

And even if that's the case, bear in mind that free T is measured in pg/ml (like E2) and not ng/dl. To convert, divide by 10. So a very high free T level of say, 500 (range is 35-155) would be only 50 ng/dl. If free T is not being included for whatever reason in the total T value, then your 4,000 ng/dl would then "only" be 3,950 after that 50 was "drained away" to become free. So... no significant effect at all on remaining "total" T levels.

This is exactly the same deal with E2, btw. A sky-high E2 level of 200 pg/ml is only 20 ng/dl, so the "drainage" effect on T is absolutely minuscule. And it's even worse than that due to the 1-2 hr H/L of T vs. 15 hrs for E2... so the necessary aromatization to maintain that E2 level would be even 10x smaller -- in this example, a 2 ng/dl "hit" on your T levels. Irrelevant.
 
Well... Generally speaking with certain protocols an AI is not used for the idea it alters the results. Some believe that is true and some do not.

Proviron lowers SHBG (Sex hormone Binding Globulin) which prevents estrogen from forming. By preventing estrogen from forming, DHT can be used to prevent the aromatization of other steroids as well.

This could potentially effect total levels. However i always assumed proviron assisted in free'ing more testosterone that the body can use.

In
 
velociraptor44 said:
Provi shouldnt effect TT. Honestly im alittle skeptical of Simec all round. You planning on doing follow up labs Gdawg?
Click to expand...

Proviron increases free test by its abillity to interact with the shbg and aromatase.....allowing for greater unbound testosterone...

the total testosterone includes ALL testoosterone....bound, unbound or loosely bound.....

think of it this way...would you rather have 3000ng/dl total test and 200ng/dl free test --or--- 1500ng/dl total test and 500ng/dl free test???

1500/500 is way way better numbers wise....its all greaat when people use the random friend said guess method to gauge the quality of a compund...when in fact your gauging a failry worthless number when it comes to muscle building....
 
velociraptor44 said:
Provi shouldnt effect TT. Honestly im alittle skeptical of Simec all round. You planning on doing follow up labs Gdawg?
Click to expand...
I was just comparing my two cruises because I already had a base . One came in at 1387 vs. the 871 with the provi being the only change . Same AI as well. I plan to blast Starting Monday , so as far as follow ups no . At least not for a while.
 
chocolatemalt said:
Do you think they're forging results at the behest of source companies? It's not impossible but seems a little far out.

I'm not sure about the Free T vs. Total T idea... In theory the "Total" should include all of: free T, lightly-bound T (albumin), and tightly-bound (SHBG).

And even if that's the case, bear in mind that free T is measured in pg/ml (like E2) and not ng/dl. To convert, divide by 10. So a very high free T level of say, 500 (range is 35-155) would be only 50 ng/dl. If free T is not being included for whatever reason in the total T value, then your 4,000 ng/dl would then "only" be 3,950 after that 50 was "drained away" to become free. So... no significant effect at all on remaining "total" T levels.

This is exactly the same deal with E2, btw. A sky-high E2 level of 200 pg/ml is only 20 ng/dl, so the "drainage" effect on T is absolutely minuscule. And it's even worse than that due to the 1-2 hr H/L of T vs. 15 hrs for E2... so the necessary aromatization to maintain that E2 level would be even 10x smaller -- in this example, a 2 ng/dl "hit" on your T levels. Irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Thats exactly what im saying and i have said it before. I just find it funny people take simec as gospel. There have been alot of inconsistency with their test results and users among many labs and even other testing operations.
 
velociraptor44 said:
Thats exactly what im saying and i have said it before. I just find it funny people take simec as gospel. There have been alot of inconsistency with their test results and users among many labs and even other testing operations.
Click to expand...

Very true
 
velociraptor44 said:
Thats exactly what im saying and i have said it before. I just find it funny people take simec as gospel. There have been alot of inconsistency with their test results and users among many labs and even other testing operations.
Click to expand...

Bummer, if true. I haven't been following the "saga" if this has a history.

Seems easy enough to catch them on, if expensive. Get a vial of Pharmacom and an empty vial (or some other lab)... swap contents, or fill the Pharmacom bottle with pure GSO. Send them in and see what they report. Do this with multiple brands. Throw in some Watson and the like as well. Yeah that would require some serious testing cash but it would make for a juicy story for an online publication like IronMagazine... and maybe worth the money and hassle.

I guess my point is that rackets like what you're suggesting are difficult to keep secret. Maybe no one has put their methods through the wringer yet.
 
IML Gear Cream!
Im not trying to shit on anyones parade but ive seen alot of issues with simec since it popped up on the radar and im just trying to play the other side if the table so people can look into themselves. Its why researching and digging is so important. Informed is armed.
 
velociraptor44 said:
Thats exactly what im saying and i have said it before. I just find it funny people take simec as gospel. There have been alot of inconsistency with their test results and users among many labs and even other testing operations.
Click to expand...

I've had questions about Simec as well. When they started, they tested four or five labs primo and damn near all of them came back legit. One of the most notoriously faked compound in the industry, and most labs passed?? That raised red flags on the process. It may not be as anonymous as indicated.

I can't say they're forging results because that would mean that the labs are in on the scam. I would hope pharmacom values their reputation more than that, but in this game we play nothing would surprise me.
 
Back
Top