+ 12 How much anabolics do you need
Do we really need more anabolics the bigger we get? This is something I have been pondering lately. I really don’t think we need to be increasing significantly the amount of anabolics we take as we start getting bigger. What we are shooting for is to put the body in an anabolic state so that it has the opportunity to grow when we eat, train and rest properly. Are we in a more anabolic state with 1000mg of test compared 500mg? Sure your test levels are going to be higher but does this necessarily correlate into “better” gains. The body can only be so anabolic, right? You often hear people saying “I no longer get the same effect from 500mg of test that I used to.” I need to take 1000mg now just to get the same effect” is what you commonly hear. Are they really getting the same effect, though? With those 500mg cycles when you first started I am assuming you were amazed at the 20lbs you were putting on each cycle. Years later now do you now require 1500mg of test to gain 20lb of quality weight? Can you even gain 20lbs/ cycle now or do you need that much just to be happy with a 5-6lb gain? So in essence 500mg of test basically results in no gains at all now?
I guess one of my main points after all this rambling is that we can’t expect that 20lb muscle gain after each cycle and trying to chase that dream by running copious amounts of test is just that, a pipe dream. You are likely to get bigger, but how much bigger compared to running a more basic cycle of test (again water weight doesn’t count here.) Once the body is in an anabolic state, growth should be occurring. Is running double the amount of test, say 1500mg compared to 750mg of test really needed to put the body in an anabolic state and elicit quality growth. What type of growth can one realistically expect after years of cycling? There comes a point when the body will no longer accept more mass no matter how much AAS we run.
I myself haven’ ran any super-duper what I would call high test or really advanced bulking cycles but still seem to be making good progress. Would I get significantly better gains by doubling everything? I am sure I would have to battle more sides but would the gains be that much better?
What I do think is beneficial to keep maximizing gains is to start stacking compounds after a certain point. I believe many compounds are synergistic when ran together so 1+1=3 which is better than just double the amount of a single compound. Adding in some deca or EQ to your normal test base can significantly change things and make a difference but we also have to be careful not to overdo things here also and everything needs a progression. There are also other compounds that may be needed to really progress further but those can be saved for advanced discussion. Are you at a point now where you have to incorporate those compounds or you can’t gain no matter what anabolic you run?
What I am really curious about here is what other guys who have been doing this for a long long time think if it is really necessary to run say double of what you used to (ie 1500mg of test compared to 750mg for example) to elicit growth anymore. How much extra growth do you think you are achieving by running the higher doses compared to what you used to? Are other compounds absolutely necessary after reaching a certain point to make any significant progress no matter what anabolics you run?
- Bookmark
- 12
- 0
The analogy i use for taking anabolics is like this, use what works and no more.
Alotta guys use the equivilent of shooting 100mg of morphine IV for a stubbed toe...
It will get the job done but so willl some ice........thats for the newbie guys wantimg to run tren sust dbol drol on the first or second cycle.... when a couple ccs of plain test will be PLENTY!!!
Good post
“What I am really curious about here is what other guys who have been doing this for a long long time think if it is really necessary to run say double of what you used to (ie 1500mg of test compared to 750mg for example) to elicit growth anymore.”
No. While I’ve posted some monsters in the advanced forums that were given to me by high level coaches, I believe megadosing is unnecessary. One can only get so big off of anabolics IMO. Peptides are what break plateaus. More/better food break plateaus.
Elevated IGF levels is the name of the game.. not Mega dosing anabolics
My best cycles have been the ones I have used IGF-LR3 with GH.
Hey Makwa, I've just been looking into getting some IGF1 LR3 after reading yours and other articles saying how effective it is. But I've been told from a few other members that real IGF1 costs thousands to buy per vial and these UGL's and peptide companies don't make the real thing - whats your take on this as you run it?
All I can say is the IGF I have been using has been a game changer so there appears to be some legit stuff out there. What I would avoid is the pep companies selling IGF for $50 for a mg of it. That is something to avoid for sure.
Big thanks for your response mate, much valued
RustyhookerI prefer moderate doses in a stack over a big single chem. When i was young 300mg test and 30mg winny was plenty. After 210 it became more of a chore. Time to restart lower stacks and add in hgh and igf1-lr3 etc... Go low and hit more angles in growth
Youve proven that in the last few years. Big gains with pure focus and kept it simple. Your changes were the hgh and igf...boom.
Just throwing this out there for discussion. As we add more mass do we create more androgen receptors with that muscle mass which will allow us to utilize higher doses of AAS??
Test is known to increase muscle mass and satellite cells and mynonuclei. The question for me would then be would these new cells even need a higher dose or would the 500mg dosage still be enough being that the new cells have fresh receptors. Just based on my experience the bigger I’ve gotten the more gear I used. The smaller I’ve gotten the less gear I use.
That kind of comes back around to my original post. Once we are in an anabolic state (say with 500mg) are able to go into a higher anabolic state with more AAS? Is that anabolic state like a like a light switch? Once it is turned on we can't turn it on anymore, so find that threshold to turn it on and you are good to go?
From what I know, steroids just acts as the on/off switch. Because hormones are simply messengers in the body, they tell us when to be anabolic or catabolic. However, as we produce more nuclei, more androgen receptors are built. (androgen recepetors are located in the nucleus). However it doesn't mean you will need more gear to stay the same size. It just means we would need more if you wanted to grow.
My question is, is desensitization overrated? Because people with natural levels do not desensitize and consistently put on lean mass for many many years. Also people with higher natural levels will have on average more lean mass vs someone with low/medium levels. So i don't believe the body is trying to necessarily go to homeostasis, otherwise people with high levels would see similiar results to people with average levels. Not promoting forever blasting. Taking time off is great to recover your endocrine system, and for longevity. It is just a thought
RustyhookerUnsure is desensitization is the right word or not. But max genetic potential seems to be easily proven. Maybe saturation is better?
My old saying is 'why grab the jack if a 6 pack gets it done?' Meaning to approach with as light a dosing as possible until more is needed. The body will get used to the level of hormones and results will stop/stall. Thats where i believe desensitization occurs. We try to then adjust cals and gym to squeeze a lil more gains. As we stall again....head into pct and time off. Compare that to a beer. You had your first and got a buzz. But taking beer daily worked you up to 6pk with no effect. Take 6mo off and have 2 beers...boom!
Genetic potential and IF its pushed properly. We all know "that guy/girl" with real genetics for strength sports or body building. You saw em in high school growing at a fast rate naturally. Seemed so easy for them. And if they kept pushing hard into the 20's they will hit that max muscle mass.....their genetics are tapped. So they add even a small dose of gear like 300mg test a week and boom! Its a night and day result. Eventually 300 wont work past 6lbs added so they hop to 300 with provi...boom! Til they still max out regardless of gear amounts. Using ALL gear even.
Look at the pro in the sport you like. In an entire year they might add 1 or 2 pounds. Knowing full well what they used. 1 or 2.... and compare that to the typical guys like us where 6 to 10 is still achievable. Do we need more gear or better food and rest? Or fall back to small stacks where more receptors are hit? Imo...the small stack with more receptors works great!
Examples can be found with personal use proofs on this site. Phil went to the olympia. 1 to 2 pounds in a year was max. But he was jacked as hell!! Obviously. Talk of free test and provi, unbinding, and sbh in general wasnt really touched on this site. A few of us pushed hard to research and post those reports under various names here. Hit a fact base over broscience. And in many results we found much truth in broscience when fact digging was done properly. How? Because theres not much science based info on steroids in athletes due to its illegality. But its all out there if ya know where to look.
And max genetic in natty guy thats fully jacked and max potential in a roid bodybuilder/power sports....you can see it without much searching at all. Hard work just stands out. Add in the nitro fuel and its clear that you use. Freaks like Lee Priest stayed natty til after pro if i remember right. Compare those pix as a genetically gifted dude.
The receptors can only take so much of a substance and the more you flood them the more they will shut down.
sexualtyrannasaurusmore broscience with absolutely no evidence to support.
It's called receptor shutdown. Yes, bIgger cycles-lead to bigger gains, but receptors tend to shutdown so that what/ MAKWA Is saying is the gaIns are not proportional to the extra gear taken. If doubling a compound only leads to an extra 1% gaIn, you need that as a pro cuz it could be the difference between wInning and losing. But do you need that 1% if you're an amateur?
Absolutely agree - if this were true guys would be winning the Olympia & WSM on 1g test a week and some tren...I don't know why its even being debated as to whether bigger cycles are more effective at building muscle mass and strength.
Show me that literature
Unless you mean that when they’re done being active they shut down/die off, by you’re forgetting a new one will then pop up in its place ready for more.
Anabolics increase receptor density and sensitivity. They don’t “clog them up” and make them useless.
receptors come and go all the time. It’s not like you’re born with 5000 receptors and you’re stuck with them for life.
HCG is an example, if you take too much, the receptors will fry/desensitise.
yes and no. The leydig cells can become desensitized over long term high dose use. However, we need to remember that all HCG does is mimic LH in the leydig cells. It's not actually LH, which could be why. It's pretending to be something that it's not. This isn't completely a receptor issue though. We can also argue that opiod receptors become decensitised, but it's more so the dopamine/serotonin release that becomes lesser rather than the receptors not being responsive.
On top of that, studies have shown conflicting results as to whether or not HCG becomes less effective over time.
http://www.eje-online.org/content/53/2/315.short
http://www.eje-online.org/content/77/4/753.short
Either way, that's a very fair point, but not exactly the same. In the case of androgen receptors, they are up-regulated by androgens, as apposed to desensitized and/or down-regulated.
Correct. But perhaps he’s suggesting a person has hit their anabolic threshold. I know mine is high as fuck as I’ve never hit it.
good point
IrishMack.... waiting on you to chime in bro
Great post! ++
The greatest progress I've ever made was when I switched from 1000 sust / 600 deca to 250 Test E. and 50 Provi.
Great post and a topic worthy of further discussion.
I’m much more patient as I’ve gotten older. Slow and steady works for me and my goals. +2
I dont have any real scientifically proven facts for what im avout to say. But needing more to compensate for getting bigger makes sence. The examples i know for facts are two friends i have . Both on hrt through a clinic. The same doctor same pharmacy products. One is 5'10 and 125# soaking wet. And does not lift. He is on 90 mg a week and it keeps his test at 900. The other example is 5'8 240# and does sets on bench with 360# he's pretty jacked he has a script for 125mg a week and it keeps test at 675. Seems to me ( the guy that doesn't know much) if a milligram is deluted into a cup of water it will have more parts per million than the same deluted into a gallon. Which would explane bigger needing more. The fact that if you dont eat and train right more isnt going to matter.
Thats one way too look at it. Another key factor though is your aromatization rate. I don't think LBM really impacts this as much as genetics and the way your physiology functions. If you have a higher rate of aromatization, your test levels will not stay as high as someone with a low rate.
StevebZero really
I recently had the best run I've had. 200 mg test e 100 mg mast e and 25 mg provi. No ai needed. Felt the best I've felt in years. Not bloated weight gain. Just a few ticks lower on the bf and a couple pounds on the scale. But I'm with what Jarhead said below. Not competing. Just living my life +2. Curious on the responses you will get
+2 It wouldn't budge this old man but I've always thought why take it if everything is working. Leave the sledge hammer for the big jobs. That's why I'm the only dude in my town that doesn't use tren...
X2. Especially with the tren
Perfect example!!
To bad we don't have a set of twins to test the theory...
I'm definitely stronger on a gram of test vs 750. More aggressive, more libido. Do I grow more? Idk the gains are so slow at this point it's hard to say. Definitely less water and backne on the lower dose.
AnonI've never ran over 400mg test in a 7 day period per cycle, now I'm curious, I'd like to move into a 4XL
Hello Sir,
Great read Sir and very interesting subject. Majority of our forum athletes including us should not be worried that much about the numbers of injectable hormones here but would rather concentrate more on nutrition factor and training techniques.
However we all fall in to trap where we think more is better but that's not always the case. Would rather agree on synergetic effects of the compounds mixed together that is mentioned above.
Again on the other hand more and more information is now available for general public about IFBB Pro's cycle routines and the numbers used in their regimen are insane. You will not surprise anyone with 30iu of growth hormone daily that has to be split in many doses and timed right, couple of grams of hormones and all other "staff" that to us amateurs just sounds silly.
We have to remember that for majority of us this sport is just a hobby, we do not make living out of it so our job is to make it as safe as possible even though we all know this is not the healthiest sport in the world.
Life tends to be in balance, all the positives we get from the hormone use there will be something negative to follow, we have to keep that in mind
Regards
Fuckin A. Great read/opinions as always.
Sidenote: I've been doing some reading on L-Carnitine L-tartrate and it's effect on androgen receptor density & sensitivity. Could possibly be another tool to get more out of what we're using instead of upping the dosage. I have to do more research but it looks promising. There are a couple studies on it that I have to dig into more.
Sounds interesting. I also posted this a while back which I think has merit.
https://www.eroids.com/forum/hgh-peptides/rhgh/better-response-to-aas-wi...
Yea i'm glad you posted that. It was in my favorites but they all got deleted when my account was hacked. I gotta go through your forums and add the ones I had favorited back for easy reference. The stuff from P is harder to find since he's been banned. At least I can just go to your and a couple other guy's profiles. I'm still super bummed I lost them all.
Great post bro!! Also IMO, there should be a distinction between those that compete & those that don’t. I don’t compete & I’m not a full time bodybuilder & I do this for fun & my health. Which that being said, I try to stay in the “long term” goals & that means choosing what may not be as healthy for me long term me. Risk vs reward.... for me more isn’t better & I’m ultimately better off to use the minimum needed for the results I’m seeking! I’m curious to see what others say like you said!! +2
Spot on as usual JH. +2
^^^^ This! ^^^^
Good read bro
Diminishing returns however frustrating is real. Great post.
I like 600mg test tops I'm not a fan of pinning.
Heaze2016I think no matter how much you run there comes a point in life where you plateau. Your body has no more room for growth. I'am sure age and genetics can play a factor in this as well.
True to a point. Weak point training can go along way for the aging bodybuilder. Even Phil Heath can make improvements. That's really what separates the real guys.
I agree!!
+2 Because I admire your life work. Your not the usual gear head. No homo..
I can’t say that anyone ever told me the admire me before... I feel kinda warm & tingly now
NO HOMO. Lol