Clenbuterol Cycles - if we only had an elevation change on the Hog Parcours...

HOW TO MAKE A CLENBUTEROL CYCLE

| Clenbuterol | Buy Clenbuterol | Best Place to Buy Clenbuterol |
| Clenbuterol for Sale | Clenbuterol Side Effects | Clenbuterol Dosage |
| Clenbuterol Cycles | How to take Clenbuterol | Clenbuterol - Q&A |
| Clenbuterall | Clenbuterol Profile | Clenbuterol Pictures | Clenbuterol Videos |

Your goal is to lose weight so you turn to your computer and go online. You search through a myriad of sites trying to find the right diet or slimming pill. Many of them make so many promises and so you spend believing to achieve the same results as promised. You followed the directions to the letter and yet you have not successfully lost the pounds you expect. What happened? Clenbuterol is the most popular fatburning pill that is widely circulated in the world of bodybuilding, athletics and Hollywood. It is a very effective thermogenic pill that increases the body temperature and facilitates the rapid utilization of calories. It prevents thestorage of glycogen and suppresses the appetite. It doesn’t retain water so you are sure that the bulk you have is not due to bloating but to pure muscle. Sounds good? Definitely. However to achieve this you must have a properClenbuterol cycle. Most bodybuilders have developed their own Clenbuterol cycles. You don’t need to be abodybuilder to make your own Clenbuterol cycle especially since this steroid has become available to non-bodybuilders and non-athletes.

As a stand alone steroid Clenbuterol cycle is two weeks on and two weeks off at 120-140mcgs a day for men and 80-100mcgs for women. Since Clenbuterol is a Beta 2 sympathomimetic it affects the Beta-2 receptors. This causes a resistance to the steroid. It also has a longer half-life that makes the 2 day on, 2 day off Clenbuterol cycle unsound to follow.  The typical Clenbuterol cycle for men begins at 20mcg dosage per day. It increases in increments of 20mcgs everyday. So your consecutive doses should be: 20mcgs, 40mcgs, 60mcgs, 80mcgs, 100mcgs, and 120mcgs. The 120mcgs will be maintained until day 14 of your Clenbuterolcycle. You will experience involuntary shaking and excessive sweating as the steroid increase your body heat and begins the process of fat burning. When this happens do not end your cycle unless the trembling is already causing discomfort. If it does reduce your dosage again in increments of 20mcgs.

Clenbuterol is used for 2 reasons: weight loss or strength gain. If your goal is to slim down you follow the 4-6 week Clenbuterol cycle. However, if you decided to follow this cycle start using Benadryl since high doses of Clenbuterol can cause receptor downgrade especially when used beyond 3 weeks. 50-100mgs before bed time is the recommended dosage. Don’t take it while doing your training as this will cause you to become drowsy. For strength gain on the other hand, follow the 3-4week Clenbuterol cycle.

Using Clenbuterol with other thermogenic compounds will cause a dramatic decrease of fat and it does not inhibit calorie intake. When used with other anabolics cycle, Clen is a great cutting agent. It decreases fat and highlights the muscular mass.

Follow the Clenbuterol cycle and expect to slim down or become leaner in just a month. Sticking to the cycle will also prevent you from the harmful effects of overdosing. Don’t forget to listen to your body as well. Indications that you are taking too much of Clenbuterol include excessive trembling of the hands, palpitations, increased blood pressure, and nausea.

Sample Clenbuterol Cycle for Males:

Week	Clenbuterol
1	40mcg/day
2	40mcg/day
3	-off-
4	-off-
5	60mcg/day
6	60mcg/day
7	-off-
8	-off-
9	60mcg/day
10	60mcg/day

Buy Clenbuterol - Roid-Shop.com

http://www.isteroids.com/Clenbuterol/Clenbuterol_Cycles.html

Opinion: The Contador saga continues

I'm calling BS on this. It is well known that clenbuterol is used 
for weight control. It is well known that the greater the power to 
weight ratio, the faster a rider goes up the mountain and Michele 
Ferrari has identified the magic ratio years ago. The immediacy 
with which the Contador team cited tainted meat that someone 
had brought from Spain as the reason for the positive was 
indicative of a pre-prepared excuse. BTW, what in the world is 
a cyclist doing eating beef in the middle of the Tour - what 
happened to the pasta? Now this opinionator is suggesting that 
the tests are too accurate detecting minuscule amounts of 
clenbuterol and that a minimum threshold is needed. It is there 
or it is not, there is no reason for a minimal acceptable amount 
of clenbuterol to be in the system.

By: 

Peter Cossins

Do you like this?

Buzz

Volta a Catalunya leader Alberto Contador (Saxo Bank Sungard)

view thumbnail gallery

The issues at stake in the Spaniard's doping morass

So, we now know that the UCI willappeal against the Spanish federation’s decision not to ban Alberto Contador. Moreover, UCI boss Pat McQuaid has suggested that the result of this appeal should be known by the time the Tour de France starts on July 2. This would be a great help to us all as, almost a year after the event, we would finally have confirmation on whether Contador did win the 2010 Tour de France and also whether he will be able to defend that title.

However, past history makes clear that appeals to the Court of Arbitration for Sport can take up to six months before a verdict is announced. And even if the CAS manages to wade through the arguments in four months, the Tour will have finished and Contador may well have won it for a fourth time, at which point he could become the first rider ever to be stripped of two Grand Tour titles at the same time - or, in fact, three if he wins this year’s Giro d’Italiaas well.

Looking at the complexities of this issue, a couple of things stand out. Most obviously, the fact that the most outstanding stage race rider of the current generation is under scrutiny has created a fundamental problem for anyone organising, watching or competing in a stage race in which Contador lines up.

Effectively, we are all now watching two races within one. Contador may win the battle on the road more often than not, but if the CAS finds in the UCI’s favour, the Spaniard will be stripped of victories in not only the 2010 Tour, but also Murcia and Catalunya, plus perhaps a number of other races he’s set to ride before the verdict is announced including Flèche Wallonne, the Giro and this year’s Tour.

The other thing that stands out is that reading through that list of races it is quite easy to see Contador winning them all. He really is that good. His victory in Catalunya was his the 17th stage race success of his career, putting him just one behind Lance Armstrong’s career total of 18 - and the Spaniard is still only 28.

Among those 17 are five Grand Tour wins in just six starts, the odd one out being his debut appearance at the Tour in 2005. If the CAS finds in his favour, Contador may well go on to become the greatest stage race rider the sport has seen since Bernard Hinault and perhaps even since the incomparable Eddy Merckx.

There is good evidence that the CAS will find in Contador’s favour. Based on documents submitted to Spanish federation by his legal team and obtained by Cyclingnews, his tainted meat defence stands up according to a number of well-respected scientific experts. A quick trawl of the Spanish press also reveals extensive evidence that doping of cattle with clenbuterol in order to boost the quality of the meat does take place in Spain, despite what the breeders’ associations may have vociferously claimed. Also in Contador’s favour is the fact that the CAS has cleared a number of athletes for non-intentional ingestion of banned products, in some cases by way of tainted meat.

But whether you are convinced by Contador’s legal team or not, one issue that cannot be denied is that increasing numbers of athletes are testing positive for very small traces of clenbuterol, perhaps as a result of more sophisticated testing. If nothing else, the Contador case ought to kickstart a discussion on whether a threshold on clenbuterol needs to be introduced.

Peter Cossins is on Twitter at twitter.com/petercossins

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/opinion-the-contador-saga-continues

A Hill in Spain

chapeau J-Lo...again...

The Austerity Delusion...hmmm, inflation anyone?

OP-ED COLUMNIST

The Austerity Delusion

By PAUL KRUGMAN

Published: March 24, 2011

• RECOMMEND
• TWITTER
• COMMENTS (472)
• E-MAIL
• PRINT
• REPRINTS
• SHARE

Portugal’s government has just fallen in a dispute over austerity proposals. Irish bond yields have topped 10 percent for the first time. And the British government has just marked its economic forecast down and its deficit forecast up.

Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times

Paul Krugman

Go to Columnist Page »

Blog: The Conscience of a Liberal

Readers' Comments

Readers shared their thoughts on this article.

• Read All Comments (472) »

What do these events have in common? They’re all evidence that slashing spending in the face of high unemployment is a mistake. Austerity advocates predicted that spending cuts would bring quick dividends in the form of rising confidence, and that there would be few, if any, adverse effects on growth and jobs; but they were wrong.

It’s too bad, then, that these days you’re not considered serious in Washington unless you profess allegiance to the same doctrine that’s failing so dismally in Europe.

It was not always thus. Two years ago, faced with soaring unemployment and large budget deficits — both the consequences of a severe financial crisis — most advanced-country leaders seemingly understood that the problems had to be tackled in sequence, with an immediate focus on creating jobs combined with a long-run strategy of deficit reduction.

Why not slash deficits immediately? Because tax increases and cuts in government spending would depress economies further, worsening unemployment. And cutting spending in a deeply depressed economy is largely self-defeating even in purely fiscal terms: any savings achieved at the front end are partly offset by lower revenue, as the economy shrinks.

So jobs now, deficits later was and is the right strategy. Unfortunately, it’s a strategy that has been abandoned in the face of phantom risks and delusional hopes. On one side, we’re constantly told that if we don’t slash spending immediately we’ll end up just like Greece, unable to borrow except at exorbitant interest rates. On the other, we’re told not to worry about the impact of spending cuts on jobs because fiscal austerity will actually create jobs by raising confidence.

How’s that story working out so far?

Self-styled deficit hawks have been crying wolf over U.S. interest rates more or less continuously since the financial crisis began to ease, taking every uptick in rates as a sign that markets were turning on America. But the truth is that rates have fluctuated, not with debt fears, but with rising and falling hope for economic recovery. And with full recovery still seeming very distant, rates are lower now than they were two years ago.

But couldn’t America still end up like Greece? Yes, of course. If investors decide that we’re a banana republic whose politicians can’t or won’t come to grips with long-term problems, they will indeed stop buying our debt. But that’s not a prospect that hinges, one way or another, on whether we punish ourselves with short-run spending cuts.

Just ask the Irish, whose government — having taken on an unsustainable debt burden by trying to bail out runaway banks — tried to reassure markets by imposing savage austerity measures on ordinary citizens. The same people urging spending cuts on America cheered. “Ireland offers an admirable lesson in fiscal responsibility,” declared Alan Reynolds of the Cato Institute, who said that the spending cuts had removed fears over Irish solvency and predicted rapid economic recovery.

That was in June 2009. Since then, the interest rate on Irish debt has doubled; Ireland’s unemployment rate now stands at 13.5 percent.

And then there’s the British experience. Like America, Britain is still perceived as solvent by financial markets, giving it room to pursue a strategy of jobs first, deficits later. But the government of Prime Minister David Cameron chose instead to move to immediate, unforced austerity, in the belief that private spending would more than make up for the government’s pullback. As I like to put it, the Cameron plan was based on belief that the confidence fairy would make everything all right.

But she hasn’t: British growth has stalled, and the government has marked up its deficit projections as a result.

Which brings me back to what passes for budget debate in Washington these days.

A serious fiscal plan for America would address the long-run drivers of spending, above all health care costs, and it would almost certainly include some kind of tax increase. But we’re not serious: any talk of using Medicare funds effectively is met with shrieks of “death panels,” and the official G.O.P. position — barely challenged by Democrats — appears to be that nobody should ever pay higher taxes. Instead, all the talk is about short-run spending cuts.

In short, we have a political climate in which self-styled deficit hawks want to punish the unemployed even as they oppose any action that would address our long-run budget problems. And here’s what we know from experience abroad: The confidence fairy won’t save us from the consequences of our folly.

A version of this op-ed appeared in print on March 25, 2011, on page A27 of the New York edition.

...from David Kotok - Some Thoughts About the Oil Price

BY DAVID KOTOK03/28/2011

• Print
• Share
• Font Size

The TV is crammed with industry folks and analysts calling for the oil price to fall $20 or $30 per barrel.  They argue there is a geopolitical risk premium that is part of the current price.  They may be right, BUT no one knows how to measure a “geopolitical” risk premium.  We can only guess at it.

Market forces set prices.  We see them in the oil market for various types of oil and for various maturities in the futures markets.  Those prices are all well above the $70-$80 range.  As Dennis Gartman points out well in his daily letter, the futures market tells you the expected cost of holding an oil inventory in actual storage vs. using a financial instrument in place of the physical storage.  If you go by the markets, the outlook for oil is well above $70-$80 and headed higher.

Various estimates of global oil demand center on 88 million barrels a day for 2011.  In some excellent research Barclays assembles the outlook for oil from four key sources.  Barclays also runs longer-term supply/demand analysis on a global basis and then projects the oil price. 

Barclays estimates that the oil price can be about $185 by the end of this decade.  It can be $135 within a couple of years.  This is without a supply shock that may result from current violence in MENA.  In addition, we add, it is without any supply shock originating in Nigeria or other Sub-Saharan African oil sources.

We remain overweight oil and energy in our US exchange-traded fund portfolios.  The current weight of the energy sector in the S&P 500 index is about 13.5%.  We are about 20%, which is about as high as we would go with a sector this large.  We remember that the energy sector reached nearly 25% of the total market weight when the Shah of Iran fell in 1980 and the oil price then spiked to $30 a barrel.  We also remember that the sector weight fell to as low as 7% when oil plunged in price to as little as $10 per barrel a few years ago.  

The key to oil is to be nimble.  You can buy it and hold it forever or you can change your weight, depending on richness or cheapness.  When the energy sector is priced as a single-digit percentage of the US market, it is cheap.  When it is above 20%, it is richly priced.  Currently we are in the middle.  

Oil and energy is currently neither cheap nor dear.  Therefore, the pricing of the stocks in this sector depends on the outlook.  Here the information is available and the outlook for US companies remains positive. 

The US is dependent on imports of oil.  We get it mostly from ten countries.  Dennis Gartman reports the sources in his letter today.  They are listed by size of imports:  1. Canada 1.972 million barrels per day, 2. Mexico 1.140 bpd, 3. Saudi Arabia 1.080 bpd, 4. Nigeria .986 bpd, 5. Venezuela .912 bpd, 6. Iraq .414 bpd, 7. Angola .380 bpd, 8. Colombia 338 bpd, 9. Algeria .325 bpd, 10. Brazil .254 bpd

Since global oil is priced in US dollars and is likely to be priced that way for a long time, the issue for a US investor is the dollar price discovery and how that will unfold.  MENA violence aside, it is clear that the US dollar price of oil is likely to go up. 

Some of that “up” will be due to weakening currency.  Some of it will be due to rising global demand.  Some of it will be due to the absolute failure of the US ENERGY POLICY WHICH MAKES US DEPENDENT ON FOREIGN-SOURCED OIL.  And some of it will be due to the supply shocks from geopolitical risk in MENA and elsewhere.

The total of these things suggests that the upward price bias estimated by Barclays is a correct thematic view for an investor.  At Cumberland, we remain overweight the energy sector.  As we have written several times: “This is nowhere near over.” 

Resources:To sign-up for Market Commentaries from Cumberland Advisors:http://www.cumber.com/signup.aspx