other anticatabolic

[THEHUGE]

question about penthoxyfilline(that's right in english?).is it anyhow useful in the pct time frame as a non-steroidal related anticatabolic in your opinion?

[dinoiii]

sp. - pentoxyfiline?

Kind of a somatostatin analogue and blood thinner, is this the agent you speak of?


D_

[THEHUGE]

TRENTAL.I didn't know about its somatostatin analogies.Dharkam on meso-rx is talking about its use as an ubiquitin proteasome inhibitor.

[THEHUGE]

Grow Even When Off Steroids! Part 2 by Dharkam here is the article.

[dinoiii]

There are a lot of inaccuracies in that article and one of the most basic rationales behind why people loose muscle mass into PCT is because of their relative "abuse" of SERMs (pro-estrogenic at the level of muscle tissue).

If it is your plan to use a somatastatin-analogues, you have to contend with physiologic inhibition of GH and subsequently IGF-1, which compounds an already complex story into PCT - the only thing at which we'd be accomplishing is increasing levels of wasting.

Somatastatin analogues also decrease insulin to a huge degree with significant promotion of counter-regulatory agents...while this may sound like a complex story, the single answer is quite simplistic - anti-insulin is anti-anabolic.


D_

[THEHUGE]

thanks for the input. I couldn't find anything anywhere about its somatostatin-like action.

[opfor101]

i wouldnt waste much money on this, not enough people have taken it
to report on how good it works.



catabolism occurs even on steroids, only that the rate of anabolism to catabolism is much greater and therefore we see a greater increase/density in muscle mass.

if you are eating enough to make up for the bodies inefficiency at creating proteins (actin and myosin)
at a time of low testosterone (post cycle) and taking proper SERMS and test boosters
then you should be fine as far as keeping gains is concerned.

[dinoiii]

Originally Posted by opfor101

catabolism occurs even on steroids, only that the rate of anabolism to catabolism is much greater and therefore we see a greater increase/density in muscle mass.

Perhaps, however, there is DIRECT action at the glucocorticoid receptor suggesting a lot more than the agent in question with AAS.

As for catabolism...it isn't inherently "evil" as supplement ads and many erroneous bb-message board posters would lead you to believe. Take "fat loss" - fat loss in and of itself is a CATABOLIC process. How many want to really impede that. Keep it in check - perhaps, eliminate it...hardly.

if you are eating enough to make up for the bodies inefficiency at creating proteins (actin and myosin)at a time of low testosterone (post cycle) and taking proper SERMS and test boosters then you should be fine as far as keeping gains is concerned.

The above statement holds a lot of inaccuracy which is still why people continue to bonk into post-cycle regimes. And it has nothing to do with eating enough; bbers eat plenty I assure you.



D_

[opfor101]

Originally Posted by dinoiii

Perhaps, however, there is DIRECT action at the glucocorticoid receptor suggesting a lot more than the agent in question with AAS.

As for catabolism...it isn't inherently "evil" as supplement ads and many erroneous bb-message board posters would lead you to believe. Take "fat loss" - fat loss in and of itself is a CATABOLIC process. How many want to really impede that. Keep it in check - perhaps, eliminate it...hardly.





The above statement holds a lot of inaccuracy which is still why people continue to bonk into post-cycle regimes. And it has nothing to do with eating enough; bbers eat plenty I assure you.



D_

i understand what you are saying, catabolism is a natural and needed process.
and i agree with the part about glucocorticoid receptors, apparently AAS's
block the effects of glucocorticoids, while jacking up actin/myosin production.


My main point on the PCT wasnt the diet as so much as SERMs are still needed to raise testosterone levels fast enough to maintain the muscle mass gained from a cycle.
I dont know where my innaccuracies are.

Let me know.

[THEHUGE]

I think D was referring about your statement about the ABSOLUTE necessity of a serm to keep gains. Pretty much the opposite since they act as estrogen agonist in muscle tissue.