[Calum]

Hi cal great to see you join the board…

I know you have a very impressive T1 diabetic client (im T1D also)

Just wondering apart from the obvious pros and cons of being t1, do you have any tips or advice how to get the most from this situation? Eg – manipulation of medication/food etc to make it as beneficial as possible in terms of assisting with the goals!

Thanks

Hey buddy

Yes that would be Brad, he’s got exceptional potential, 24 years old and 306lbs as of this morning, we’re aiming for 2Bros Raistrick Royal Rumble and UK Arnolds this year.

For brad, there are a few things we’ve actioned in this offseason which has held us in a good spot, in complete control over BG management and eating over 1000g carbs per day;

– constant freestyle libre use for 24 hour monitoring

– basal insulin use daily with rapid acting insulin usage around certain meals

– metformin use daily

– NEAT / aerobic work kept in year round

– keeping composition in a good spot year round, controlling the inflammatory environment present

Calum Raistrick | #TeamProCoach | info@teamprocoach.com | Use code PROCOACH10!

[Calum]

Philipp

Be VERY patient with your dose escalations, I’d literally just add 50mg onto whatever your physiological TRT was initially, and introduce 100mg of primo alongside, then add a little more once we reach the first sticking point, continue to do this holding test the same, once the primo is around 250mg a week, bump your test up another 50mg, then repeat the process.

That’s a very rough outline but just shows you, we DO NOT need to be aggressive with androgen load when your history of exposure is so low to date, just creep above that physiological border first, map out 16-20 weeks of patient escalation in total, then pull back physiological for circa 8 weeks (bear in mind clearance times of the esters in play), then repeat with a tiny bit more next week as your start mg/wk.

For your blood pressure, keep some aerobic work in year round, 40mg/day telmisartan would be pretty smart if tolerable, include some organ support (vital support + love heart), and keep an eye on RBC and blood viscosity.

“And why primo at 150mg initially and not just 50mg for example, like an increase I would make with the test if I could tolerate more too ?”

Hey man, well you could go in at 50mg/wk primo, but just considering the dose response you’d get from this, it would be so minimal.

Depends how patient you are 🙂

100-150mg/wk would bring appreciable impacts on protein accretion being driven and composition / performance improving.

Calum Raistrick | #TeamProCoach | info@teamprocoach.com | Use code PROCOACH10!

[Calum]

Philipp

Be VERY patient with your dose escalations, I’d literally just add 50mg onto whatever your physiological TRT was initially, and introduce 100mg of primo alongside, then add a little more once we reach the first sticking point, continue to do this holding test the same, once the primo is around 250mg a week, bump your test up another 50mg, then repeat the process.

That’s a very rough outline but just shows you, we DO NOT need to be aggressive with androgen load when your history of exposure is so low to date, just creep above that physiological border first, map out 16-20 weeks of patient escalation in total, then pull back physiological for circa 8 weeks (bear in mind clearance times of the esters in play), then repeat with a tiny bit more next week as your start mg/wk.

For your blood pressure, keep some aerobic work in year round, 40mg/day telmisartan would be pretty smart if tolerable, include some organ support (vital support + love heart), and keep an eye on RBC and blood viscosity.

Thank you so much ! Yes I will do 150mg per week, my trt dose was 100mg per week and this put me at the top end of normal.
Do you think I can use Test only first without any primo ?

After how many weeks should I increase the dose each time?[/quote]

For sure, if the TRT was physiological at 100mg/wk then I’d simply escalate to 150mg/wk test only initially and run for 8-12 weeks, rinse, then increase by another 25-50mg and repeat, you’re going to get to a point where you may not have the capacity to manage E2 with test only once it’s escalated to a certain input, at that point, I would hold the test there and introduce primo, 150mg/wk initially, then titrate slowly beyond as needed patiently.

Calum Raistrick | #TeamProCoach | info@teamprocoach.com | Use code PROCOACH10!

[Calum]

Philipp

Be VERY patient with your dose escalations, I’d literally just add 50mg onto whatever your physiological TRT was initially, and introduce 100mg of primo alongside, then add a little more once we reach the first sticking point, continue to do this holding test the same, once the primo is around 250mg a week, bump your test up another 50mg, then repeat the process.

That’s a very rough outline but just shows you, we DO NOT need to be aggressive with androgen load when your history of exposure is so low to date, just creep above that physiological border first, map out 16-20 weeks of patient escalation in total, then pull back physiological for circa 8 weeks (bear in mind clearance times of the esters in play), then repeat with a tiny bit more next week as your start mg/wk.

For your blood pressure, keep some aerobic work in year round, 40mg/day telmisartan would be pretty smart if tolerable, include some organ support (vital support + love heart), and keep an eye on RBC and blood viscosity.

Calum Raistrick | #TeamProCoach | info@teamprocoach.com | Use code PROCOACH10!

[Calum]

Hi Michel

A great topic of discussion looking at the interplay between DHT derivatives.

In ideal circumstances, yes primo would be my preferred choice there in combination with the highest tolerable testosterone base (remember the higher the DHT deriv, the higher the tolerability to testosterone relative to E2 management).

Masteron shares similar properties, but purely from an anecdotal standpoint, it would not be my first pick of the bunch there unless it had to be.

In the circumstance I couldn’t source primo, I’d use testosterone, enough masteron to tolerate a sufficient testosterone mg/wk to elicit the progress desired, and add some nandrolone alongside to stimulate that 19-nor pathway as/when needed, or even a small dose of tren (for instance 100mg/wk).

Tren shares high tissue selectivity (and inhibition of glucocorticoids) but of course has a very skewed cost to reward ratio when dosed higher.

Nandrolone has it’s drawbacks, like any androgen if abused, but can be tolerable with ‘sensible’ exposure.

As with anything drug related, there is a personal decision to be made here in regards to your risk to reward.

There is also a spectrum of justifiable usage too (which is totally on you), are we dealing with a first time user here or someone trying to turn pro, win a pro show or gain a top placing at the Olympia.

Calum Raistrick | #TeamProCoach | info@teamprocoach.com | Use code PROCOACH10!

[Calum]

Quanta, minus one batch of test last year, it’s very reliable and have HPLC to prove this and a lot of client blood work to confirm anecdotally too. I’d pretty much opt for Q exclusively now.

Rohm is usually reliable (again minus a few teething issues you hear of from time to time).

Calum Raistrick | #TeamProCoach | info@teamprocoach.com | Use code PROCOACH10!

[Calum]

Hi Dan

Typically speaking the management of dietary fibre is going to be relative to the phase an individual is in.

For instance;

Offseason > hyper caloric state meaning high kcal input, more food variety, more food volume, easier to hit fibre targets by default without having to ‘chase it’ per say, unless appetite is so low veggies are not being consumed sufficiently (which is quite common place to see), fruits can be used there as a tool instead.

Prep > hypo caloric state meaning low kcal input, less food variety, and most likely more of a need to supplement with a fibre product to ensure motility is standardised.

There is definitely argument over fibre and its role in glycemic control and insulin sensitivity, most of that literature is based in T2 diabetics, and the obese, looking at dietary interventions to improve the metabolic environment present.

Generally a good rule of thumb here is 10g total dietary fibre per 750kcals

Calum Raistrick | #TeamProCoach | info@teamprocoach.com | Use code PROCOACH10!

[Calum]

Hi Drew

My general thought process here is push the bracket of this phase until we no longer have a responsive environment, just before this kicks in, stop pushing up and hold, let that bodyweight set point and new level of musculature marinate and stick, 6-8 weeks, then tidy up, then rinse repeat.

Bodyweight gain in an offseason phase is simply relative to the level of response being maintained, there is a difference between being 40lbs up off stage weight and maintaining perfect blood glucose management, perfect sleep, great aerobic capacity, great appetite, then the opposite situation when those variables reverse and go in the opposite direction.

I will say however, I can definitely confirm anecdotally in the earlier training years, the naturals who are afraid of allowing a little fat to come on in favour of performance rising, typically end up being the ones who never really change from offseason to offseason.

Push your food progressively alongside your energy demands rising, hit your ceiling, hold it for a bit, tidy it, repeat it. Simples 🙂

Calum Raistrick | #TeamProCoach | info@teamprocoach.com | Use code PROCOACH10!

[Calum]

Hey Niko

I wouldn’t want to comment specifically on the matter without seeing Bloodwork but just throwing out some food for thought…

There is a little literature on OSA (i.e. apnea) / sleep deprivation on elevated RBC – https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16770648/

“revealed that as the average oxygen saturation dropped, hematocrit increased. The low oxygen environment created by sleep apnea is a potential mechanism for elevating hematocrit and reducing oxygen, and as the oxygen decreases, the body aims to compensate for this”

We can most definitely link OSA to WBC skewing due to the pro-inflammatory environment being created – https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18597046/

Simple solutions for me would be yes, doning, every 12 weeks without fail.

IP6 (this is actually in Vital Support) – an<font face=”inherit”> iron chelation, </font>providing<font face=”inherit”> hematocrit and hemoglobin modulation alongside some anti cancer </font>properties<font face=”inherit”>. </font>

I’d be looking at the elevated RBC and looking at systemic impacts from this, are we able to regulate blood pressure, do we have hereditary links in your family line, what form of exercise program are you using, even down to where you live!

Calum Raistrick | #TeamProCoach | info@teamprocoach.com | Use code PROCOACH10!

[Calum]

Hi Chris

I think the main issue with chest/back in unison is the recovery demands being SO high, you could definitely make it work but total volume (and the stimulus/fatigue ratio of each movement hand picked) would need to be very carefully managed

Calum Raistrick | #TeamProCoach | info@teamprocoach.com | Use code PROCOACH10!

[Calum]

Hi Roby

Big fan of this split for a ‘top line’ orientated phase.

Lots of medial delt, clavicular pec and arm work involved, allocating that volume out over the 6 days.

Day 1 – Push (chest / delts / triceps)

Day 2 – Pull (back musculature, biceps)

Day 3 – Rest

Day 4 – Arms + Delts (biceps, triceps, medial delts, rear delts)

Day 5 – Legs (add one lat movement onto legs at the start)

Day 6 – Rest

Nice set up here catering for those needs

Calum Raistrick | #TeamProCoach | info@teamprocoach.com | Use code PROCOACH10!

[Calum]

Hi Chris

I think we need to start viewing the ‘split’ in this circumstance as ‘what is this individuals specific needs’.

The upper/lower format has some great benefits, it’s easy to program for recovery (neurally, muscularly, connective tissue wise), it keeps stimulus frequency high, and it’s very easy to fit within a schedule as we only need 4 days available.

Upper/lower might be troublesome for advanced individuals at a high strength output, as neural demands (dependent on exercise selection) might mean multiple muscle groups skew that stimulus to fatigue ratio. For instance heavy pulls and heavy presses in one session. Perhaps at this state we need to branch out into allowing a more singular focus per session, coupling your pulls together, coupling your presses together, running legs as its own entity alongside.

I’ve always found the U/L format is outgrown by an athlete when they’re advanced enough to ‘need’ more volume per muscle group per session. Of course we can look at weekly volume landmarks too within this, but all that volume bunched up into one session for me often means the first 2-3 movements are nailed, then fatigue kicks in and the rest suffers.

In summary, no split is ‘too advanced’ or ‘too simple’, it just either caters for your needs or it doesn’t.

Hope this helps!

Calum Raistrick | #TeamProCoach | info@teamprocoach.com | Use code PROCOACH10!

[Calum]

Hello all!

Any questions pertaining to training, nutrition, drug deployment within physique enhancement, blood work, please just drop them in here and I’ll get back to you!

Calum Raistrick | #TeamProCoach | info@teamprocoach.com | Use code PROCOACH10!

[Calum]

Thank you!

Calum Raistrick | #TeamProCoach | info@teamprocoach.com | Use code PROCOACH10!