Well certainly not the response's I was anticipating my friend and I would quite happily dispute some of your rebuttals however, I think we shall leave things there as you know my standing when it comes to that particular branch of the nutritional tree.
For now one final question regarding the use of performance enhancers, a few persons I am acquainted with stay 'ON' continually and seem to gain...what is your opinion on continual cycling as per the 'mythical' GH15 professed to being the path to physical enlightenment....
Bless you, my child.
May I address your enquiry in reverse order?
To wit: Within my realm of advisings, I know of no high level competitor who chooses to use the 'time on equals time off' protocols; thus, as far as maximal gains for said high level competition are concerned, then no, whether a traditional '6 on 6 off' or a 14-21/21-28 day SHIC (God awful term BTW, oft used by sinners devoid of knowledge pray the origins of short cycles; thus these most lust filled bastards will remain forever ignorant of from where Borresen did steal) they are all given over in favour of yearly cycling with perhaps one or two months of fasting come the festival of bloodwork.
Most of the cretins in this regard will lather me in great verbal fasion of their short cycles, waxing whimsical that they are 'off after four weeks' amongst other claims, but upon a little enquiry into the compounds used - buy those such as the hob goblin named sandra - we find fallen spirits from the book of esther named such as Enanthate, Undecanoate and other contradicatory, chaotic sorcery!!!
Now, my son, let me address your first point, re: your opinion of my rebuttle.
Brother T, for every one of those listed talents, a cite can be given, to wit, feel free to spew forth thine dispute, so cursed by great spasticity.
The scales will lift yonder from thine eyes, dear child.
Godspeed.
