DNP is one of if not the most powerful fat burner in history. This compound will see fat, pure body fat melt off the individual’s frame rapidly and abundantly. Further, once the fat is lost it will be very easy to maintain the now lower body fat percentage. This compound literally attacks and destroys fat cells. Consider twenty pounds of pure fat loss in only a few weeks. For that matter consider only half that amount and already you have an extremely appealing fat loss medication. No one can deny DNP is powerfully effective, so effective it’s seemingly magical when we consider the fat loss potential. However, we cannot consider the fat loss potential without recognizing the risks. DNP truly is poison, and it will claim lives. Granted, some will get away with use, this is simply the way many things work in life, but many will not. Even if you follow the guidelines about staying cool and keep your dose at a low to moderate level the risk is still there, you may die.
In a retrospective study, Abejon and associates (2007) assessed the effectiveness of PRF applied to the lumbar DRG for the treatment of LBP. This study analyzed the findings of 54 patients who underwent 75 PRF procedures. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to the etiology of the lesion: (i) herniated disc (HD), (ii) spinal stenosis (SS), and (iii) failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). The analgesic effectiveness of the technique was assessed using a 10-point NRS at baseline and, along with the Global Perceived Effect (GPE), at 30, 60, 90, and 180 days. The reduction in pain medications and the number of complications associated with the technique were assessed. A decrease in the NRS score was observed in patients with HD (p < ) and SS (p < ), but not in those with FBSS. The GPE scores confirmed this finding. No complications were noted. The authors concluded that PRF of the DRG was significantly more effective in HD and SS than in FBSS patients. The application of PRF was ineffective in FBSS.
As alluded to above, one very important thing to acknowledge when using AAS (whether taking one hormone, stacking or cycling) is the risk of harmful side effects. Within a steroid cycle, the users will often stack other non-anabolic hormones into their program to maximize specific cycle objectives for example: the addition of drugs like Clenbuterol and/or Cytomel /T3 augment cutting/definition cycles; others called aromatase inhibitors (estrogen reducing drugs) like Letrozole . Letro and Anastrozole Arimidex are often included to inhibit the conversion of excess testosterone to negatively cycle impacting estrogen and; incorporating post-cycle therapy (PCT) drugs such as the synthetic estrogens Tamoxifen . Nolvadex , or Clomiphene Citrate . Clomid (which act as anti-estrogens in the male body), can be used alone, together, or in conjunction with those like Mesterolone . Proviron and Human Chorionic Gonadotropin ( HCG ) during PCT to bridge the gap between the end of a steroid cycle (synthetic testosterone usage) and the restoration of the bodys natural testosterone production. These drugs too must be researched, and controlled in similar fashion to AAS. Thus, steroid cycles can be as simple or complex as the users individualized goals, cycle histories and levels of understanding. Below are three samples of AAS stacked cycles of varying complexity along with a beginning PCT sample, and an explanation of goal intention & rationale for the selected compounds, dosages & durations. These illustrations and commentaries will provide a better understanding of what stacking and cycling are along with the many nuances they require.