AI + PCT DISCUSSION

[imontheloose]

Have you advocated for HCG use on-cycle, post-cycle, or both?

I’ll advocate for doing hCG during your cycle and a touch after.

 

[aids]

I’ll advocate for doing hCG during your cycle and a touch after.

We are in agreeance then.

 

[gymcelled]

And it’s still the only study on PCT. This is my literal point.

I didn’t confirm my beliefs by it. I stated that the only study on it had a negative impact yet initially affirmed there is no data on it, so I actually disregarded the study myself.

You are absolutely clueless. If the study said it helped, I’d have shown it helped in this one particular study so there isn’t enough data to say it helps. Same way here I will say the only study was negative so there’s no reason to believe it’ll have a positive effect.

You’re unironically the lowest IQ user on this site.

as i said, ur low iq, pls dni

but since ur still here, what do you think about this then

Full recovery may be possible among men who use steroids for muscle growth

There may be hope for full recovery among men who wish to stop using anabolic-androgenic steroids for muscle growth, according to data being presented on Saturday at ENDO 2023, the Endocrine Society’s annual meeting in Chicago, Ill.

www.endocrine.org

 

[imontheloose]

as i said, ur low iq, pls dni

but since ur still here, what do you think about this then https://www.endocrine.org/news-and-advocacy/news-room/2023/endo-2023-press-jayasena

@aids @SlayerJonas @chadisbeingmade @wishIwasSalludon

 

[aids]

source=chatgpt.com

Again, nothing is definitive. I'd love to see an actual study on this rather than just data (which for all we know could just be their interpretation of the drugs' pharmacokinetics).

 

[Midasw]

And it’s still the only study on PCT. This is my literal point.

I didn’t confirm my beliefs by it. I stated that the only study on it had a negative impact yet initially affirmed there is no data on it, so I actually disregarded the study myself.

You are absolutely clueless. If the study said it helped, I’d have shown it helped in this one particular study so there isn’t enough data to say it has negative impacts. Same way here I will say the only study was negative so there’s no reason to believe it’ll have a positive effect.

You’re unironically the lowest IQ user on this site.

i guess, but theoretical ways for pct still exist and it works anacdotally, its worth doing as its cheap and side effects arent that serious (except clomid but who uses that trash anymore)

 

[gymcelled]

View attachment 4037094View attachment 4037095
@aids @SlayerJonas @chadisbeingmade @wishIwasSalludon

using the best research tool for research is bad

 

[aids]

i guess, but theoretical ways for pct still exist and it works anacdotally, its worth doing as its cheap and side effects arent that serious (except clomid but who uses that trash anymore)

All this argument is about is that there is no proof PCT helps/doesn't help/hinders.
We can't rely on anecdotal evidence, so any decision you make regarding PCT is not completely informed.

 

[imontheloose]

using the best research tool for research is bad

Oh yes. It’s definitely the best research tool. I mean, random hallucinations and internal biases to reflect input beliefs are obviously not to care about.

Hilariously, you scrambled to edit out ChatGPT’s source tag out of shame. You’re an absolute idiot.

ChatGPT is made to be polite to you; it will try affirm the user’s input as best it can.

 

[SlayerJonas]

i got hcg as well, but just for the end of my cycle, before i start pct

Stupid move. You're supposed to permarun hCG (with breaks due to LH desensitisation).

Some steroids themselves reduce estrogen levels (but that's bullshit, DHT derivatives). Obviously, most people don't need PCT. Fuck your hormones? I'll be on testosterone and growth hormone for the rest of my life lol. That's why bridges are used instead of PCT

Some androgens reduce the ER-mediated effects, but the misattribution that they consequently decrease serum E2 levels is wrong.

i want to do one cycle just to boost my gym progress, and then i can continue naturally.
that’s why i want pct - to try and recover fully from it (ofc i know thats not guaranteed)

Your gym progress will stagnate very hard and you'll feel the desire to do another blast, and another blast. This is a warning.

your explanation is just a random statement “the pituitary bounces back quickly”
any evidence of that? feel free to share the studies that told u this fact.

He showed a study and I'll add that there's enough data on individuals on progesterone derivates successfully recovering their HPT-Axis after being on for years, progesterone is very harsh on the HPT-Axis FYI.

so if pct helped 90 people and didn’t do anything for 10, majority doesn’t matter and we can conclude it’s useless because of the 10 people?

interesting view

This is not what I'm saying.

rando org user knows more than the millions of bodybuilders swearing by pct

That's what I replied to. All of these bodybuilders are wrong considering doing PCT this way is wrong. Also the majority of bodybuilders doesn't know about SERMs anyway.

To clarify, are you saying HCG specifically for PCT, or as on-cycle support, for coming off easier?

I'd permablast HCG for the majority of my life. It's a bit tricky while on-cycle as it keeps the endogenous steroidogenesis intact which means we need to take care of E2 more carefully, etc.

Enclomiphene wouldn't speed up recovery, it'd rather reduce the symptoms of low T.

The study (I think) you are referring to is flawed, given the soonest bloodwork that the participants had done post-cycle (excluding immediately), was 3-months post-cycle.

No person running a 3 month cycle of AAS will run PCT for 3 months, especially given all participants had normal blood results pre-cycle.

It would have been better to have participants do bloodwork 1 month post-cycle as well, to more effectively gauge the contributions of PCT. I also don't recall which compounds they used for PCT, maybe you can shed some light, but unless all commonly-used SERMs were included in the study en masse, we can't rule them out as not helping.

You cannot definitively conclude that PCT did not help with recovering endogenous production, solely because sperm count was lower in the experimental group one year after the beginning of the cycle.

I am not necessarily saying that this means PCT is going to expedite recovery, but you cannot rule it out given how the study was conducted.

I personally will run HCG for the remainder of my cycle and PCT with Enclomiphene, I'd rather waste money and have slightly lower sperm volume 9 months later, than potentially inhibit my recovery time by not using it.

The study was also financed by the anti doping agency of the Netherlands funnily enough. Most people citing this study should know that this a very flawed study, but it's the only one on this specific topic.

View attachment 4037094View attachment 4037095
@aids @SlayerJonas @chadisbeingmade @wishIwasSalludon

We're also talking with AI-generated individuals boyos.

 

[Midasw]

i recommend everyone here read through this thread, it has some great info about the subject at hand, more than all of reddit

PCT Guide

Post Cycle Therapy (PCT) Post Cycle Therapy or PCT is a period of medication treatment that follows the use of anabolic steroids. Post Cycle Therapy is also one of the most confusing topics for many steroid users; this is largely due to misconceptions. When to start PCT, which meds to use, how...

looksmax.org

 

[gymcelled]

Oh yes. It’s definitely the best research tool. I mean, random hallucinations and internal biases to reflect input beliefs are obviously not to care about.

Hilariously, you scrambled to edit out ChatGPT’s source tag out of shame. You’re an absolute idiot.

ChatGPT is made to be polite to you; it will try affirm the user’s input as best it can.

when asking chatgpt for study links it can hallucinate? ah i see youre very VERY retarded

it is very good at scanning entire research databases and sharing links to whatever youre looking for, instead of having to google them

lowlowlowiq

 

[imontheloose]

when asking chatgpt for study links it can hallucinate? ah i see youre very VERY retarded

it is very good at scanning entire research databases and sharing links to whatever youre looking for, instead of having to google them

lowlowlowiq

It’s really not. And yes, it does hallucinate when searching for studies. There have been examples here of @Copercel literally posting studies that don’t even relate to the topic. It isn’t a good research tool; you can trust me, I have actually worked very closely with LLMs.

Notice how you have dropped your initial argument of PCT and moved onto desperately defending something you don’t understand.

 

[aids]

I'd permablast HCG for the majority of my life. It's a bit tricky while on-cycle as it keeps the endogenous steroidogenesis intact which means we need to take care of E2 more carefully, etc.

Enclomiphene wouldn't speed up recovery, it'd rather reduce the symptoms of low T.

I still would see this as a win personally, since I don't want to be on TRT for the rest of my life from such a young age, but it's more out of principle than actual logic.

The study was also financed by the anti doping agency of the Netherlands funnily enough. Most people citing this study should know that this a very flawed study, but it's the only one on this specific topic.

Evidence against, not proof.

We're also talking with AI-generated individuals boyos.

 

[aids]

when asking chatgpt for study links it can hallucinate? ah i see youre very VERY retarded

it is very good at scanning entire research databases and sharing links to whatever youre looking for, instead of having to google them

lowlowlowiq

Even when I have used GPT 5 Pro and deep research, it still has hallucinated at times.

 

[Midasw]

using the best research tool for research is bad

chatgpt isnt even the best LLM let alone the best research tool

 

[gymcelled]

It’s really not. And yes, it does hallucinate when searching for studies. There have been examples here of @Copercel literally posting studies that don’t even relate to the topic. It isn’t a good research tool; you can trust me, I have actually worked very closely with LLMs.

Notice how you have dropped your initial argument of PCT and moved onto desperately defending something you don’t understand.

I mean it’s difficult to argument pct with someone who has his owns beliefs and won’t budge on them, no matter what anyone else says.

I’ll be doing pct, and I’ll share the results.

I don’t really see any argument against pct, apart from “it might not work”

Unless u’re poor, why not just use it and hope for the best

 

[imontheloose]

I still would see this as a win personally, since I don't want to be on TRT for the rest of my life from such a young age, but it's more out of principle than actual logic.



Evidence against, not proof.

You’re meant to be Mr. High-IQ according to OP. It seems he believes whoever smidges any light on his preconceived opinion is all of a sudden worthy of oral pleasure.

 

[gymcelled]

Even when I have used GPT 5 Pro and deep research, it still has hallucinated at times.

I know it can hallucinate, but when asking for links to studies, it literally can’t?

It can’t make up a new webpage that doesn’t exist can it

 

[imontheloose]

Even when I have used GPT 5 Pro and deep research, it still has hallucinated at times.

chatgpt isnt even the best LLM let alone the best research tool

This is genuinely hilarious. OP thought he was going to be praised and instead he’s been molested.

 

[imontheloose]

I know it can hallucinate, but when asking for links to studies, it literally can’t?

It can’t make up a new webpage that doesn’t exist can it

It hallucinates by giving you an incorrect link. That’s what they are. Just like it hallucinates 4+6=9. I’ve literally had that happen before.

 

[aids]

I know it can hallucinate, but when asking for links to studies, it literally can’t?

It can’t make up a new webpage that doesn’t exist can it

It actually can, but you'll just be brought to an error 404 rather than a real study.

 

[gymcelled]

It hallucinates by giving you an incorrect link. That’s what they are. Just like it hallucinates 4+6=9. I’ve literally had that happen before.

It actually can, but you'll just be brought to an error 404 rather than a real study.

that’s why u actually verify what the study says afterwards? what are we even arguing about atp

just open the link and look at the study

i dont use it to summarize the study, but to find me links to studies that relate to my question, then i open the study, and read it.

 

[aids]

It actually can, but you'll just be brought to an error 404 rather than a real study.

This is not to say ChatGPT isn't helpful, but you should take everything with a grain of salt and try to ask questions from an unbiased stance so as to not influence the response.
You're much better just using academic search engines like Google Scholar.

 

[imontheloose]

that’s why u actually verify what the study says afterwards? what are we even arguing about atp

just open the link and look at the study

i dont use it to summarize the study, but to find me links to studies that relate to my question, then i open the study, and read it.

So you basically could’ve searched on PubMed, found it and been certain, but instead you sent links which I know you didn’t actually read through, but thought they were right…

 

[aids]

that’s why u actually verify what the study says afterwards? what are we even arguing about atp

just open the link and look at the study

i dont use it to summarize the study, but to find me links to studies that relate to my question, then i open the study, and read it.

Reading the abstract =/ reading the study though.
I am not saying ChatGPT isn't helpful, as mentioned here:

This is not to say ChatGPT isn't helpful, but you should take everything with a grain of salt and try to ask questions from an unbiased stance so as to not influence the response.
You're much better just using academic search engines like Google Scholar.

But it's often going to just give you studies for a topic without considering that there might be overwhelming evidence against a particular study, the study might be flawed, etc.

 

[imontheloose]

This is not to say ChatGPT isn't helpful, but you should take everything with a grain of salt and try to ask questions from an unbiased stance so as to not influence the response.
You're much better just using academic search engines like Google Scholar.

Literally says on the bottom of the screen to verify all information it tells you. And precisely, why can’t OP just verify his information by starting on PubMed in the first place?

 

[gymcelled]

So you basically could’ve searched on PubMed, found it and been certain, but instead you sent links which I know you didn’t actually read through, but thought they were right…

to search pubmed you need to have decent wording and search for titles that might be different, leading to you missing something.

 

[imontheloose]

to search pubmed you need to have decent wording and search for titles that might be different, leading to you missing something.

So you don’t use PubMed because it’s hard to search through? And I’m low-IQ? @SlayerJonas

 

[gymcelled]

Literally says on the bottom of the screen to verify all information it tells you. And precisely, why can’t OP just verify his information by starting on PubMed in the first place?

now ur just saying random shit
whats the difference between searching on pubmed and searching for pubmed studies through gpt?

 

[aids]

Literally says on the bottom of the screen to verify all information it tells you. And precisely, why can’t OP just verify his information by starting on PubMed in the first place?

I think it's the convenience of ChatGPT also giving summary to a study, but again it is very often not objective and responses are skewed based on phrasing of a question.
It can be useful only when leveraged correctly though it's often not.

 

[aids]

now ur just saying random shit
whats the difference between searching on pubmed and searching for pubmed studies through gpt?

This is not to say ChatGPT isn't helpful, but you should take everything with a grain of salt and try to ask questions from an unbiased stance so as to not influence the response.
You're much better just using academic search engines like Google Scholar.

 

[imontheloose]

now ur just saying random shit
whats the difference between searching on pubmed and searching for pubmed studies through gpt?

The fact ChatGPT hallucinates a shocking amount of times and is made to affirm the user’s beliefs. It ignores flaws and will find you the closest study there is.

If you went on PubMed, you’d understand there is truly no evidence for what you’re saying. It’s what everyone with a skull does.

 

[imontheloose]

I think it's the convenience of ChatGPT also giving summary to a study, but again it is very often not objective and responses are skewed based on phrasing of a question.
It can be useful only when leveraged correctly though it's often not.

It is meant to honour the user. It tries not to upset you. I’ve literally bullied it into breaking arithmetic. It is very flawed because of that. It’s not made to be a fascinatingly accurate LLM or advanced at reasoning anyway.

 

[aids]

The fact ChatGPT hallucinates a shocking amount of times and is made to affirm the user’s beliefs. It ignores flaws and will find you the closest study there is.

If you went on PubMed, you’d understand there is truly no evidence for what you’re saying. It’s what everyone with a skull does.

To add, it might bend its interpretation of a study based on how you've written a question.
@gymcelled

It is meant to honour the user. It tries not to upset you. I’ve literally bullied it into breaking arithmetic. It is very flawed because of that. It’s not made to be a fascinatingly accurate LLM or advanced at reasoning anyway.

This as well.

 

[imontheloose]

To add, it might bend its interpretation of a study based on how you've written a question.
@gymcelled


This as well.

You can even try this yourself. If you open two chats on ambiguous topics, it will give reasons wholeheartedly for both topics in your favour depending on how leading your input is.

 

[gymcelled]

The fact ChatGPT hallucinates a shocking amount of times and is made to affirm the user’s beliefs. It ignores flaws and will find you the closest study there is.

If you went on PubMed, you’d understand there is truly no evidence for what you’re saying. It’s what everyone with a skull does.

you’re surely just ragebaiting me at this point, so i’ll go do something more productive.

searching chatgpt for “pubmed studies on the use of pct related to AAS abuse” and then opening the studies and reading what they say, does the exact same as searching on pubmed.

won’t be interacting with this subhuman anymore

To add, it might bend its interpretation of a study based on how you've written a question.

i read the study, not the summary, what’s so difficult to understand about that? i only use gpt to search FOR the studies, I don’t ask it’s opinion on them.

 

[imontheloose]

you’re surely just ragebaiting me at this point, so i’ll go do something more productive.

searching chatgpt for “pubmed studies on the use of pct related to AAS abuse” and then opening the studies and reading what they say, does the exact same as searching on pubmed.

won’t be interacting with this subhuman anymore

i read the study, not the summary, what’s so difficult to understand about that? i only use gpt to search FOR the studies, I don’t ask it’s opinion on them.

It’s not different if you actually read it. Problem is that you didn’t hence why you gave me studies to prove PCT that weren’t even about PCT. You’re the example of ChatGPT hallucinating whilst trying to please the user.

You need to commit suicide. You’re seriously worthless.

 

[gymcelled]

You can even try this yourself. If you open two chats on ambiguous topics, it will give reasons wholeheartedly for both topics in your favour depending on how leading your input is.

nigger I know how gpt works, I am not 15 years old.

I ran multiple gpt wrappers for profit, so I know to make it biased towards the user, to make them spend more time chatting

 

[Midasw]

I know it can hallucinate, but when asking for links to studies, it literally can’t?

It can’t make up a new webpage that doesn’t exist can it

its can hahahhah, it mostly something that looks like the link youre looking for, it used to only give these types of links a couple years ago and it was useless

 

[imontheloose]

its can hahahhah, it mostly something that looks like the link youre looking for, it used to only give these types of links a couple years ago and it was useless

OP is clinically retarded. Genuinely a useless sack of flesh.

 

[gymcelled]

It’s not different if you actually read it. Problem is that you didn’t hence why you gave me studies to prove PCT that weren’t even about PCT. You’re the example of ChatGPT hallucinating whilst trying to please the user.

You need to commit suicide. You’re seriously worthless.

last reply to u.

please tell me which of the studies didn’t talk about the use of pct? two of them were not about pct after aas, but for men with balls that didnt work, where pct helped.

ignoring u on org, hope to see u in a ditch next to the road someday.

keep yourself safe

 

[gymcelled]

its can hahahhah, it mostly something that looks like the link youre looking for, it used to only give these types of links a couple years ago and it was useless

OPEN THE FUCKING LINK

I OPEN THE LINK

AND READ THE STUDY

YALL ARE FR JUST RAGEBAITING ME XD

 

[imontheloose]

last reply to u.

please tell me which of the studies didn’t talk about the use of pct? two of them were not about pct after aas, but for men with balls that didnt work, where pct helped.

ignoring u on org, hope to see u in a ditch next to the road someday.

keep yourself safe

Wasn’t about PCT. I told you one was a single case and the others were about general hypogonadism. You can’t establish PCT effectiveness after a cycle when your data is indirect to AAS.

Ignoring me like the high-inhib cuck you are won’t make PCT randomly work. You have been absolutely molested here. Not only do you have no idea how LLMs work but you have no idea how PCT works. Muh ChatGPT can’t hallucinate links. Muh me edit source tag. Muh muh.

I know why you’re so misinformed: you get all your information from a flawed, biased LLM.

 

[Oreone]

It is meant to honour the user. It tries not to upset you. I’ve literally bullied it into breaking arithmetic. It is very flawed because of that. It’s not made to be a fascinatingly accurate LLM or advanced at reasoning anyway.

chatgpt told me my bones would be 30% bigger and my height would be 6 inches from hgh + androgens

 

[imontheloose]

chatgpt told me my bones would be 30% bigger and my height would be 6 inches from hgh + androgens

How stupid. It’s obviously 40% and 7 inches. @SlayerJonas

 

[Midasw]

OPEN THE FUCKING LINK

I OPEN THE LINK

AND READ THE STUDY

YALL ARE FR JUST RAGEBAITING ME XD

it wasnt a response to your study perse, it was a respone to your comment claiming chatgpt cant hallucinate links, it can, and it will if pushed

 

[Oreone]

How stupid. It’s obviously 40% and 7 inches. @SlayerJonas

Just out of curiosity he used the results of studies conducted on children with growth hormone deficiency, with a dosage of about 6 IU per day, which resulted in an increase in predicted growth by about 5 cm over several years. I asked him to experiment with the dosage if necessary. He decided that if 6 IU was equivalent to 5 cm, then 18 IU would be equivalent to 15 cm, even if you did not have a growth hormone deficiency. this is because he doesn't know how to work with research at all, and he's giving non-existent research links.

 

[imontheloose]

Just out of curiosity he used the results of studies conducted on children with growth hormone deficiency, with a dosage of about 6 IU per day, which resulted in an increase in predicted growth by about 5 cm over several years. I asked him to experiment with the dosage if necessary. He decided that if 6 IU was equivalent to 5 cm, then 18 IU would be equivalent to 15 cm, even if you did not have a growth hormone deficiency. this is because he doesn't know how to work with research at all, and he's giving non-existent research links.

Linearity is obviously always the case.

 

[imontheloose]

@SlayerJonas @chadisbeingmade @Oreone @aids @wishIwasSalludon this is OP by the way:



Never call me a subhuman again you unloveable, worthless, destined for suicide piece of shit. You should’ve been removed from the gene pool long ago. You’re a perma-incel desperate for peptides to grow your bones. You will remain an inferior beast to the average male the rest of your life. Seriously take your fucking life.