How long would it take to build muscle

00pump wrote:

AvR, true, but and I could have carried on pushing it but, I would have landed up dead. I would love to know the stats and truth of how many top atheletes who cycle year round, what health issues, and how many have a clear bill of health? Have you seen the decrease in size of all atheletes when they stop competeing, why did they stop competing? Why do they want to lose size? My thoughts is their bodies give up and then they need to rather have long breaks in between cycles and because of this they cant keep near the same muscle mass.

AvR:
Interesting, I don't know much on the topic of what the professional athletes use and for how long they use it but I think it is not worth your health to stay on permanently in the long run. I would never do it. There is a guy at my gym (he also has a supplement shop in the gym), who trains the same time in the morning as I do. I have to be honest, he looks really well. He took 2nd place at Carnival city the other day, can't remember the competition's name.

When I asked him about my cycle and PCT, he suggested that I should start PCT directly after my cycle and that I could start my next cycle 5 weeks after my last shot of test. Don’t know why one would even do a PCT when doing it this way anyway. I would never take his advice of course and stick to the recommended guides of tome on + PCT = time off. But like I said, the guy looks great.

How long would it take to get into reasonable shape following the recommended guide lines for using steroids vs natural vs doing it the wrong way (staying on almost permanently). How many kg can one expect in lets say a year. I know diet is also important but let's say that's sorted.

PS, I just copied and pasted my post from another thread... didn't feel like typing the whole thing over again...

In short, there's so many factors that can influence that it is nearly an impossible task to ever guess a number.

Sorry for the shitty answer

@AvR, year round cycles aren't worth it coz the
longer you stay on the higher you have to raise
doses (law of diminishing returns) and the more
sides you'll get.
Say if you started a year long cycle of test C
500mg/week. You'll usually pick up about 8kg in
12 weeks, but gains usually slow down after
about week 8-9. So if you stay on 500mg for the
9 more months you'll probably only pick up
another 5-7kg, that's about 13-16kg total for the
year
If you choose to increase dose by 250mg as gains
slow down say every 8-12 weeks, by the end of
the year you'll be running 1-1.5g week! You
probably would-ve picked up a little more than
you would've with a constant 500mg, but not by
a lot maybe 20-22kg total for the year.
Its very attractive if you wanna be a pro in a very
short period of time, but your health will certainly
suffer and for your next cycle you have to start off
with at least 1.5g of test and keep raising it. Is
this sustainable? Nope. Is it worth it? Ask the pros

vega5 wrote: In short, there's so many factors that can influence that it is nearly an impossible task to ever guess a number.

Sorry for the shitty answer

No problem Vega, understood!