• 💪 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!
  • 🔥 Kits4Less.com #1 MOST LAB-TESTED SOURCE — 25% OFF YOUR FIRST ORDER! 🔥

🗣️🦍 Question Thread for Mircea Balaj live 6 to 8pm e Jan 15 🦍🗣️

cdubw44

cdubw44

Board Rep
Joined
Jan 13, 2020
Messages
9,533
Reaction score
9,335
This will be the official question thread for our Thursday night special guest Mircea Balaj
Jan 15th from 6 to 8pm eastern live Q@A
Topics will be AAS, Peptides and Training.
Feel free to post your questions below 👇
Ask questions now if you can’t make it during that time.
IMG_8016.png
 
My question- If this was already answered in a previous episode, my apologies.

Is there any true benefit from taking buffered Vs unbuffered NAD? I understand that with unbuffered NAD you recon w bac water, and sodium bicarbonate. However I’ve felt no difference between the two. Just personal preference maybe??? Also is 100mg’s 3x a a week for 6 weeks a solid cycle?

Thank you!
 
Would love to hear Mircea’s thoughts on any of the following

1. DHB has been getting a lot of hype lately. Curious as to his experiences w DHB? Toxicity ? Side effects to look for ? Changes in Labs ? When it should be considered or used ?
2. Many times we take higher doses (thinking more must be better ) but dont always get better results …. How to figure out your minimum effective anabolic dose for your goals ?
3. In an attempt to minimize side effects and toxicity…. What is the minimum amount of time in order to obtain results that orals (like winstrol and Anavar ) should be employed at the end of a cut ?



Really looking forward to this interview ! TY
 
You can post any questions you might have now and Mercea will be happy to answer them when he signs on tonight
 
My second and final question. Im sure I’ll be crucified for asking it, apologies in advance. I can admit, I simply don't know what the answer is. There is a ton of info on primo dosing and what ratios to use with testosterone. Seems everyone has a different idea, different protocols and what works individually for them. 1:1, 1.5:1, 2:1…

What is the desired dose of test/primo for a bulk, and the test/primo ratio for a cut. Im in the school of thought that less is more, however i dont think that works for my body with primo.

45yrs old. 220-230lbs. Typically between 9-15% bf year around (depending on time of year). Healthy bloods. Regular blood dumps. I can provide a picture if needed.

Currently 600 test C, and 600 Primo E so a 1:1, and 2IU GH at bedtime (all SB Labs). Many gym bros have said I should up my test to a gram or more. More or less a 2:1 ratio. Not really interested in doing that. I feel if I go lower with the primo -600mgs or less it’s more of an AI for me. However 600mgs a week seems to be my sweet spot, to where I can visually see results, feel good, and have zero sides. Pulling labs in 2 more weeks. As in previous cycles with this compound at this dose my E2 was in check, and everything looked pretty good-not the best, but good.

Do you suggest I stay were I am at 600/600 during my cycle if my bloods are good, and my body is visually changing or is it over kill with the oil? Thank you in advance for the help and advice!
 
As a short follow up on the EQ - i can only run about 200 if i run test at 500 or my E2 is too low (even at that it’s like 25 which is lower than I usually like to run E2, especially in a gain phase). As I don’t currently want to push test much higher, is 200 even worth it with EQ for anabolism, or should I run something else or is it worth to keep as an AI (I’d be at or over 100 E2 without it at that test level, and I like e2 at 80-90 max) and push like NPP or deca or even then DHB?

Basically, is there a min dose below which EQ is really just an ai and you need to construct the cycle with other mass builders?

Thanks!
McP


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Thanks for taking the time to put this on!

Interested in any thoughts you might have on how PED use might differ in those pursuing things other than bodybuilding / powerlifting / strongman; be it compounds, dosages, etc. Maybe something more like Hyrox, CrossFit, or shorter distance endurance sports where events run about 7 minutes or less; essentially being strong helps but being cardiovascularly fit is the priority.
 
GH use and childhood cancer. I have read so many studies that debate each other. One side of the fence says don’t use it and the other side of the fence says there are no direct correlation proving the risks are higher of cancer growths just because you once had it. General consensus in all articles I have read it’s as simple as if you have existing issues the GH just pushes it along faster. Ran GH SB blue tops for about 6 months along side test and primo by far best I felt and looked in my 3 year journey but had some chatter in the chats I should lay off it. Cancer free for 35 years just recently had multiple tests MPN, EPO, AH-BCR, and JAK2 all came back zero signs or risks of cancers. Really wanting to run it again soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
AI use.
Situation: 750 test week, 600 mast week. E2 108. Client dead against lowering test. Bloodwork good. Bulk/strength phase. Primary issues..sensitive nips, low labido. Says he feels great when E2 is ~45-50. Which AI and schedule and why. Thanks for your time and knowledge!!
 
Welcome boys. Thank you for all of your guys participation and hopefully we’ll get some more guys to jump in here.. I gotta load Mircea up with some coffee. And he’s just gonna start answering some questions.
Hopefully you guys like this and we can do these kind of things more often
 
Dfresh41 said:
My question- If this was already answered in a previous episode, my apologies.

Is there any true benefit from taking buffered Vs unbuffered NAD? I understand that with unbuffered NAD you recon w bac water, and sodium bicarbonate. However I’ve felt no difference between the two. Just personal preference maybe??? Also is 100mg’s 3x a a week for 6 weeks a solid cycle?

Thank you!
Click to expand...
That is a very interesting question! The short answer is no. Oral NAD+ is garbage, buffered/unbuffered makes no difference. The only benefit of the addition of sodium bicarbonate (to raise the pH) is potentially less stinging/burning at the injection site, but that’s not a guarantee.

As for absorption, plasma levels, efficacy, etc. it doesn’t do anything. It’s just marketing.

100mg 3x/wk is a solid dose. I’d probably start off a bit lower to assess tolerance and response (say 50mg 3x/week) and escalate to 100mg 3x/wk. if that is the dose you find gives you the best response, you can start the next course straight away with that dose.

And you can run this for way longer than 6 weeks of you would want to.
 
Conmike41 said:
Would love to hear Mircea’s thoughts on any of the following

1. DHB has been getting a lot of hype lately. Curious as to his experiences w DHB? Toxicity ? Side effects to look for ? Changes in Labs ? When it should be considered or used ?
2. Many times we take higher doses (thinking more must be better ) but dont always get better results …. How to figure out your minimum effective anabolic dose for your goals ?
3. In an attempt to minimize side effects and toxicity…. What is the minimum amount of time in order to obtain results that orals (like winstrol and Anavar ) should be employed at the end of a cut ?



Really looking forward to this interview ! TY
Click to expand...
Sure!

  1. DHB is an awesome compound and I’m not one to shy away from saying it. Out of pretty much all AAS that I’ve seen in action and have used personally or with clients, it’s the one that has the least amounts of negative health implications in a mg/mg comparison. It drives up insulin sensitivity a lot, it improves neurological conductivity (think force production or “strength” for athletes or mind-muscle connection for bodybuilders) like no other and it is pretty potent at enhancing muscle production synthesis. The “strength” gains far outpace the muscle gains, so here is where most people mess it up - you get very strong for your size and you run the risk of burning out (depleting choline pools, neurological fatigue, over-stimulation for those sensitive to that effect that some anabolics have) or of getting injured (either acutely or just wear-and-tear over time). As for the typical health implications that you see with most AAS:
    • it doesn’t impact RBC or HGB to any meaningful extent
    • it doesn’t cause any significant amount of liver stress
    • it isn’t kidney-toxic (I’ve seen both Creatinine- and Cystatin C-based bloodwork results showing now substantial stress)
    • it doesn’t impact aggression (like Trenbolone) much more than any other anabolic
    • But just keep in mind the injury potential, the potential of “burning out”, and the potential hypoglycemia if you are in a very low caloric / low carbohydrate environment.
  2. You are correct in assuming so, and most people just take more to make up for poor training, nutrition and lifestyle choices. To determine your minimum effective dose you’ll have to look at your previous use. A true beginner would see benefits from anywhere between 3-5mg/kg, while a seasoned veteran that has a tone of artificially accrued muscle might need that just to maintain it over a longer period of time. If you are someone with a few courses under your belt, I’d look at the last course and see if you were still progressing in objective performance metrics towards the end. If the answer is yes, the you overdid the dose, if you plateaued a few weeks before the end, the dose was right and you can look at tightening up the other aspects of your protocol (training, nutrition lifestyle, recovery, etc.), if you plateaued at the midpoint and/or were regressing towards the end (training, nutrition lifestyle, recovery, etc. all being on point), your dose could use an upgrade. Now this is not the minimum effective dose to make progress, but you at least know where you stand with what you used previously. If for example you feel that your new dose should be 1000mg (just using a round number), and your bridging dose (TRT+) is 250mg you can start your dose at about 500-600mg (500mg representing 2x your TRT+ total milligrams and 600mg representing the rounded-down median of your TRT+ and your peak dose). You start at that dose and escalate slowly to your peak dose where you stay for the second part of the course.
  3. I would say 3-4 weeks would be enough to get a slight bump in anabolism from orals like Winstrol and Anavar without getting significant negatives.
 
squat to death said:
How much volume in a given week is too much for one muscle group?
Click to expand...
I get really nearby when it comes to this so I’ll try and keep it short lol.

You need to view the body as a whole, as a system. Total systemic load will matter more than local muscle load. You can tolerate 20 sets of biceps if that’s pretty much all you do, hell you may tolerate 40 if you train ONLY biceps. See any armwrestlers that train very specific movements for small muscles groups with a tone of volume. But if you do 10 sets of squats, 10 sets of barbell rows, 10 sets of pull-ups, 5 sets of deadlifts, 10 sets of bench variations, 5 sets of barbell overhead presses… and isolation work for these big muscle groups… you’ll be cooked and won’t be able to put in the effort into your bicep work. Then you have effort (or some would call it intensity), the amount of conscious exertion you put into each set, or how HARD your train. Taking 1 set to absolute failure and then doing partials, and negatives and all kinds of gruesome techniques like that, will cause a greater inroad into your recovery capabilities both local (muscular) and systemic (whole-body) than doin 5-6-7-8 sets where you don’t even come close to failure.

So designing a training program can be more complicated than just assigning arbitrary volume parameters to muscle groups and total weekly volume parameters.


TLDR: For an average say 100 set/week (+/-10 sets) with a good mix or compound and isolation movements, and an even focus on bigger and smaller muscle groups (not any specific specialization phase), and most sets take close to failure with some taken to actual failure, 8-15 sets per muscle group per week should be fine.
 
Female here

What’s your stance on women running Tesamorelin long-term while also using AAS (Test microdosing + Primo)? Any risks, contraindications, or best-practice protocol? And should I sub out the tesa for actual gh?
 
Dfresh41 said:
My second and final question. Im sure I’ll be crucified for asking it, apologies in advance. I can admit, I simply don't know what the answer is. There is a ton of info on primo dosing and what ratios to use with testosterone. Seems everyone has a different idea, different protocols and what works individually for them. 1:1, 1.5:1, 2:1…

What is the desired dose of test/primo for a bulk, and the test/primo ratio for a cut. Im in the school of thought that less is more, however i dont think that works for my body with primo.

45yrs old. 220-230lbs. Typically between 9-15% bf year around (depending on time of year). Healthy bloods. Regular blood dumps. I can provide a picture if needed.

Currently 600 test C, and 600 Primo E so a 1:1, and 2IU GH at bedtime (all SB Labs). Many gym bros have said I should up my test to a gram or more. More or less a 2:1 ratio. Not really interested in doing that. I feel if I go lower with the primo -600mgs or less it’s more of an AI for me. However 600mgs a week seems to be my sweet spot, to where I can visually see results, feel good, and have zero sides. Pulling labs in 2 more weeks. As in previous cycles with this compound at this dose my E2 was in check, and everything looked pretty good-not the best, but good.

Do you suggest I stay were I am at 600/600 during my cycle if my bloods are good, and my body is visually changing or is it over kill with the oil? Thank you in advance for the help and advice!
Click to expand...
See I don’t believe in ratios, I don’t think they are “scientific” and it’s just not how things work in real life. I believe your testosterone is pretty high for someone of your body weight and if there aren’t any particular reasons to stay at that dose, you’re probably going to be just fine at half that, or even 400mg a week. With Primobolan, unless your E2 crashes severely, I don’t see the need to try to keep it at the same level as testosterone of lower. You can escalate it as high as your total milligrams require. I don’t see an issue with just escalating it until you either run into low E2 issues, or reach your milligram target.

But if you would really like to stay sat 600mg of Testosterone and your bloodwork is fine, just escalate the Prinobolan without modifying your Testosterone dose, and maybe next time try a lower testosterone and higher Primobolan combination, or add in a 3rd compound that is possibly more specific to your goal. Maybe something like Deca is you want a bit of extra fulness and joint support.
 
Meathook said:
See I don’t believe in ratios, I don’t think they are “scientific” and it’s just not how things work in real life. I believe your testosterone is pretty high for someone of your body weight and if there aren’t any particular reasons to stay at that dose, you’re probably going to be just fine at half that, or even 400mg a week. With Primobolan, unless your E2 crashes severely, I don’t see the need to try to keep it at the same level as testosterone of lower. You can escalate it as high as your total milligrams require. I don’t see an issue with just escalating it until you either run into low E2 issues, or reach your milligram target.

But if you would really like to stay sat 600mg of Testosterone and your bloodwork is fine, just escalate the Prinobolan without modifying your Testosterone dose, and maybe next time try a lower testosterone and higher Primobolan combination, or add in a 3rd compound that is possibly more specific to your goal. Maybe something like Deca is you want a bit of extra fulness and joint support.
Click to expand...
Thank you @Meathook ! ❤️ 💪🏻!
 
McPriimate said:
As a short follow up on the EQ - i can only run about 200 if i run test at 500 or my E2 is too low (even at that it’s like 25 which is lower than I usually like to run E2, especially in a gain phase). As I don’t currently want to push test much higher, is 200 even worth it with EQ for anabolism, or should I run something else or is it worth to keep as an AI (I’d be at or over 100 E2 without it at that test level, and I like e2 at 80-90 max) and push like NPP or deca or even then DHB?

Basically, is there a min dose below which EQ is really just an ai and you need to construct the cycle with other mass builders?

Thanks!
McP


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Ok, this adds more context to the original question.

First I’d lower the Testosterone dose to something that doesn’t give you E2 issues, maybe 350mg.
Then you don’t need EQ.

Second I always create protocols based on goals. Bulk is a term that just sounds sloppy, let’s call it an offseason hypertrophy phase. You want to gain muscle without looking like Jellyroll lol.

Now that we defined the goal let’s look at the tools at out disposal:
  • a Testosterone backbone at 350mg/week
  • good mass builders - Deca & NPP
  • a good anabolic that increases strength much more than muscle mass - DHB
I’d say Deca would be a good choice because it’s longer acting and higher mg/ml dose, so you don’t end up being a pincushion. Now we have your primary anabolic. This will make up the majority of your milligrams with the purpose of building muscle.

If you feel that you need a 3rd compound to:
  • drive strength a bit higher
  • keep insulin sensitivity high while you are in a hyper-caloric environment
  • add some lean tissue without the added water gain
Then add in a small amount of DHB to enhance these characteristics. Start low 25-50mg/week and don’t go higher than 100mg tops.

Your Testosterone should be constant throughout the protocol and you Deca should escalate from week 1 to the midpoint of the course (cycle) and stay at that peak dose for the second half of your course (cycle).
 
Meathook said:
That is a very interesting question! The short answer is no. Oral NAD+ is garbage, buffered/unbuffered makes no difference. The only benefit of the addition of sodium bicarbonate (to raise the pH) is potentially less stinging/burning at the injection site, but that’s not a guarantee.

As for absorption, plasma levels, efficacy, etc. it doesn’t do anything. It’s just marketing.

100mg 3x/wk is a solid dose. I’d probably start off a bit lower to assess tolerance and response (say 50mg 3x/week) and escalate to 100mg 3x/wk. if that is the dose you find gives you the best response, you can start the next course straight away with that dose.

And you can run this for way longer than 6 weeks of you would want to.
Click to expand...
NAD in powder form that wife bought. Straight to trash can 🤣😂IMG_8325.jpeg
 
Meathook said:
Sure!

  1. DHB is an awesome compound and I’m not one to shy away from saying it. Out of pretty much all AAS that I’ve seen in action and have used personally or with clients, it’s the one that has the least amounts of negative health implications in a mg/mg comparison. It drives up insulin sensitivity a lot, it improves neurological conductivity (think force production or “strength” for athletes or mind-muscle connection for bodybuilders) like no other and it is pretty potent at enhancing muscle production synthesis. The “strength” gains far outpace the muscle gains, so here is where most people mess it up - you get very strong for your size and you run the risk of burning out (depleting choline pools, neurological fatigue, over-stimulation for those sensitive to that effect that some anabolics have) or of getting injured (either acutely or just wear-and-tear over time). As for the typical health implications that you see with most AAS:
    • it doesn’t impact RBC or HGB to any meaningful extent
    • it doesn’t cause any significant amount of liver stress
    • it isn’t kidney-toxic (I’ve seen both Creatinine- and Cystatin C-based bloodwork results showing now substantial stress)
    • it doesn’t impact aggression (like Trenbolone) much more than any other anabolic
    • But just keep in mind the injury potential, the potential of “burning out”, and the potential hypoglycemia if you are in a very low caloric / low carbohydrate environment.
  2. You are correct in assuming so, and most people just take more to make up for poor training, nutrition and lifestyle choices. To determine your minimum effective dose you’ll have to look at your previous use. A true beginner would see benefits from anywhere between 3-5mg/kg, while a seasoned veteran that has a tone of artificially accrued muscle might need that just to maintain it over a longer period of time. If you are someone with a few courses under your belt, I’d look at the last course and see if you were still progressing in objective performance metrics towards the end. If the answer is yes, the you overdid the dose, if you plateaued a few weeks before the end, the dose was right and you can look at tightening up the other aspects of your protocol (training, nutrition lifestyle, recovery, etc.), if you plateaued at the midpoint and/or were regressing towards the end (training, nutrition lifestyle, recovery, etc. all being on point), your dose could use an upgrade. Now this is not the minimum effective dose to make progress, but you at least know where you stand with what you used previously. If for example you feel that your new dose should be 1000mg (just using a round number), and your bridging dose (TRT+) is 250mg you can start your dose at about 500-600mg (500mg representing 2x your TRT+ total milligrams and 600mg representing the rounded-down median of your TRT+ and your peak dose). You start at that dose and escalate slowly to your peak dose where you stay for the second part of the course.
  3. I would say 3-4 weeks would be enough to get a slight bump in anabolism from orals like Winstrol and Anavar without getting significant negatives.
Click to expand...
TY so much, really appreciate your input, knowledge and experience!
 
C2.rowerg said:
Thanks for taking the time to put this on!

Interested in any thoughts you might have on how PED use might differ in those pursuing things other than bodybuilding / powerlifting / strongman; be it compounds, dosages, etc. Maybe something more like Hyrox, CrossFit, or shorter distance endurance sports where events run about 7 minutes or less; essentially being strong helps but being cardiovascularly fit is the priority.
Click to expand...
Oh that is such an interesting topic! I think those sports are where the non-AAS PEDs actually shine. AAS will be recovery tools more or less, then we look at the sport-specific needs…
  • endurance sports - blood volume and oxygenation (EPO, Methylene Bllue, Meldonium, etc.)
  • high-skill sports (noopept, semax, selank, etc.)
  • weight-class strength sports (low body weight increase with high strength increase compounds)
  • sports that beat specific joints into the ground like armwrestling (TB500, BPC-157, GHK-Cu, etc.)
There are tons of things that are very specific to the goal.

For sports that require short bouts of energy, things that improve neurologically, then you focus an improving recovery from training (structural and muscular) and also aerobic recovery because these are repeated bouts. You’re doing 7 minutes of work, but you have to recover fast to be able to perform another 7 minutes of work without a big drop in performance.
 
Bam221 said:
GH use and childhood cancer. I have read so many studies that debate each other. One side of the fence says don’t use it and the other side of the fence says there are no direct correlation proving the risks are higher of cancer growths just because you once had it. General consensus in all articles I have read it’s as simple as if you have existing issues the GH just pushes it along faster. Ran GH SB blue tops for about 6 months along side test and primo by far best I felt and looked in my 3 year journey but had some chatter in the chats I should lay off it. Cancer free for 35 years just recently had multiple tests MPN, EPO, AH-BCR, and JAK2 all came back zero signs or risks of cancers. Really wanting to run it again soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
This a very loaded topic. Technically. GH is not the main issue, it’s the IGF-1 derived from GH use, that’s also why you’ll see lower carbohydrate / keto diets recommended for cancer patients. Lower blood glucose > lower insulin level > lower IGF-1 secretion + higher IGF Binding Globulins which leads to less circulating IGF-1.

Technically if you are 35 years cancer-free, and all cancer markers are non-existent… the risks are minimized, but are they lower than someone who never had cancer? Maybe not.

I think here’s where you have to use your best judgement, if you feel that you are getting so many benefits and are conscious of the risks and are monitoring cancer markers… you can make a judgement call. But I would strongly suggest you check your health consistently because quality of life is really important bot also maintaining it is crucial!
 
GHk-CU better to take by its self or do you like it in the GLOW formula with the BPC and TB. Have you seen the topical GHK- CU is that stuff any good for like hair growth or anything?

So I got this bag of SLU-PP-332 that SB sent me way after prep was over and I didn’t get to test it out. But I really hate cardio 🤣 So if it cuts down my cardio in prep I am all for it. Have you used it for competitors in a prep scenario ?
 

Latest threads

Back
Top