posted Fri, 07/03/2020 - 12:21
8029
+ 6 Cool article on androgen receptor down regulation!
ad
https://www.taeian.com/androgen-receptor-down-regulation-and-its-effects...
Found the above article online today and I figured I’d share as I’ve seen many debates on the receptor down regulation topic. Seems like this guy did his homework and cited some case studies! What do you all think?
- Bookmark
- 6
- 0
I found these two recent video’s!!
I know some of you guys want to see what he looks like!
Apparently Taeian is not his real name!
https://youtu.be/_Zyico_fbrs
https://youtu.be/9KA737961As
I read a study that say L-Carnitine and caffeine improves androgen receptor density. Also intermittent fasting has a positive effect too.
Yeah fasting has a long list of benefits I like to fast at least once a week for a whole day!
There is a long list of benefits of intermittent fasting. I was doing it for almost a year but fell off. I need to get back on it. I was fasting for 17 hours a day. I gave myself a 7 hour window each day to eat all my meals. I would only allow myself water during the fasting period. I lost considerable amount of body fat with no changes to my diet besides eating times. Anti-aging is a topic of interest to me and that is what originally caught my attention about fasting.
Thats true for normal everyday people that just excersise and live a healthy lifestyle.
No benefits in androgen regulation when it comes to the fasting and steroid users.
Its basically putting your system on snooze for a bit by not eating for a period then suddenly waking it up again forcing it to kick back in quick, ot starts working more efficiently when it gets use to it digesting and detoxing quicker amongst other things.
As for the main debate.
Androgen up and down regulate.
A lay-mans examples-
If a drinker keeps drinking there is a threshold, you get drunk you get paro then you get sick.
Your body can only handle so much until it cant, then we vomit, piss or shit it out or in extreme the drs pump it out, thats because we reached the limit and the excess is not needed and is poison.
With steroids ( testosterone) we do reach a threshold but its not directly the androgen receptor but the cells that are binded to after a couple of conversions.
So when we inject testosterone we have conversions, now we know if no aromatise inhibitor is used unused test turns into estrogen.
Thats the first main vomit.
You have dht conversion and the contraversial prolactin progestin conversion.
More vomit if not controlled.
After time the cells are getting binded to quicker " saturation" and you start getting cell hi-jacking where 2 things might jump on the same one cell instead of seperate cells or others might jump on a cell that was meant for something else.
The androgen receptor starts recognising mixed signals and either starts its signalling at a higher rate to rectify or at a lower rate to rest.
This causes a whole range of other cell signalling errors and system side effects.
All the " vomit" needs to be fixed and a rest will rectify.
There is a post in stickys that ive read about cells being like a car in a carpark, i guess its somewhat true yet our body continues repleneshing and making cells all the time, its when a malfunction occurs we get the issues in the cells signalling.
Not scientific but easy for people to read.
I understand what you are saying. So what I am taking away from this is initial steroid use will up regulate androgen receptors. As the receptors get saturated things get mixed up. Androgen receptors will have mixed signals from multiple bindings. There is a constant battle between up and down regulation. So when people say there is up regulation or down regulation from AAS usage they are both partially correct.
Holy smokes I just checked on this; we have a debate of sorts! I’m gonna make some popcorn and read all this stuff. It’s gonna take me an hour! Yikes
lmao
I blame you ;-)
I'm out!
https://youtu.be/_Zyico_fbrs
He’s back!! ;0)
Speak of the DEVIL!
https://youtu.be/9KA737961As
LOL
I looked at the comments below the video quickly and found this...lmao...
"Taeian Clark
1 day ago
Youre a good guy Steve.
Leo and Longevity
1 day ago
Are you the nortestosterone "Taboo" fellow who refused to be on my podcast?'
Seems he is scared to debate anyone. No hgh with taboo..,wtf
Leo & Longevity said : He writes like an uneducated person in one of the comments! Lol
In the video and from looking at his website he seems more interesting in not losing hair and acne. Should pay his monthly fee and troll the shit out of him...lol
He’s at “Troll” status now! I don’t think he’ll be back
Shock horror, as I said, it wasn't his idea (it didn't originate from gh15 either tho!),
Shock horror, someone else who had to supplement for estrogen issues on deca only.
Starting to see a trend here BJ?!
Yeah! Casey Viator said Mike Mentzer used to take a gram a week of Deca and his last contest was 1980! Nothing new
On the Joe Rogan show CT Fletcher admitting a Dr. back in the day put him on Deca for TRT. Found it strange..,not that he isn't natty .., but deca for trt. But I am not a TRT expert.
Have a splendid weekend Bro!
Summing this up. A bunch of replies from people saying what if what if what if. What if people got lazy is why results were bad. What if other mechanisms happened. All what ifs ignoring the main point of the topic with ZERO, literally ZERO science to back up any refutes.
What has been said by me.
Androgen receptors are proven to down regulate.
Gains have been shown to stop by week 6 in studies.
Gains on long esters have been proven to have their highest peak benefit increase by week 3 and starting to show a trend to leveling off thereafter.
Androgen receptors in studies have been showing to be a make or break cause for muscle growth. Those with lowest androgen receptor content having the least to literally no growth vs those with the highest receptor content.
Studies on AAS also showed that once androgen receptor expression returns to baseline there is still a anti catabolic effect. Netting a minor benefit at best. but no further anabolic effect in itself.
Which also cross references with the anavar study showing only a 10 percent benefit past so many weeks.
Study showed androgen receptor increase was the main benefit to increased protein synthesis/nitrogen retention protein gained.
Vs a anti catabolic effect via multiple mechanisms such as glucocorticoid receptor inhibiting. which in comparison only nets a minor benefit in comparison to the anabolic effect of increased androgen receptor content.
The replies to the above have been;
What if there is another mechanism at play that's not androgen receptor related.
Great, there's lots of what if's. There could be a receptor we don't even know of yet that is causing some anabolic effect. Lots of what if's. And if there is something else going on well guess what, it still doesn't negate the fact studies have shown that on long esters the peak beenfit was at 3 weeks with a leveling off starting. And that orals gains were literally maximized by week 6 week. If its androgen receptor content or another factor with it well it still all shuts down hugely by week 6. There could be a million other factors effecting the situation, but we know androgen receptors down regulate, and androgen receptor content is one of the biggest factors here for men having literally no muscle gain vs other men with the highest having the best and most muscle gain.
Lastly while the nay says have done nothing but dodge every single reply and not answer a single rebutal question but then post more and more what if"s" but cannot reply to a single call out.
Don’t get discouraged with a negative karma! I’ve been in the red twice! One time -10 & one time -14. Happens to a lot of people for various reasons(even veterans w/ 5000 Karma). RIP RH :0) Don’t let it get to you; just keep chugging along, stay active in the forum, & your karma will grow. I’m sure there’s people on here that want to hear what you found researching in your years of AAS studies.
I bet there is. I mean considering giardarp took my postings on deca only and literally re wrote every single thing I wrote and study as his own sure shows he was interested in my writings. If you got fb bj send me a request ill let you in my private group. And tbh wouldn't mind linking everything I wrote thats been copied to a t even doses that dude has copied of mine as his own "orginal trial" like hell everything posted was from my forum post how deca cannot raise prolactin and their bloods and I was one said 3000mg even no raise and max dose. And he does a so called experiment on 3000mg... lol.. he read all my post and admits he did. So its abit ridiculous to just copy everything I posted on deca how it works and case claims then literally re writes every part no idea of his own just re writes it.
Would love others to see how he's copied it all his so called orginal idea.
Anon-1 again for ongoing defiance of the forum rules.
I have told you twice to read the forum rules.
https://www.eroids.com/forum/general/forum-rules/the-rules
No personal information allowed, and you are asking for BJ's facebook if he has one.
Previously you asked for my email so you could send me dozens of something.
You can go be a snitch somewhere else.
This idiot used his own name as his username. Google it and find his youtube, IG, his website that has a $13 a month fee, and you can see what this clown looks like.
So I guess that is why he feels he can ask others for such personal info.
Not sure why he is still arguing and wont give this shit up. Sounds butt-hurt..no hom
And looking at the dates giar submitted his deca posts it was a while ago.
Giardap vs Taeian : will there be a part 2? I have popcorn on hand. Lol
Think Giardap asked Taeian to have a debate on a new thread. Giar would enjoy debating him but this guy doesn't debate. He just argues, accuses Giar of ripping him off, and rambles on like a madman.
So not sure taeian can maintain his composer to have a srs debate.
I would be very interested if he could handle a good debate and stay on track.
I asked him a couple of times.
It would not likely be possible as he rants. I tend to post long posts too.
My posts are flawed AF, but I tend to happily edit to add others corrections, and to credit them too. The idea of posting here, is to improve the community.
As for a debate, Well... lol
AnonHe didn't read the forum rules.
"DO NOT Use your real name, or anything that could reveal your identity in your username!"
https://www.eroids.com/rules-and-guidelines
I believe he lacks the emotional fortitude to endure his online content being subject to the scrutiny of a public forum. And that is why he is butthurt. He has a lot of growing up to do.
Guess he thinks he is a Guru and everyone would be amazed by his posts. It is easier for him on his own sites because there is no direct feedback.
All of this could have been avoided if he just agreed to disagree. But obv. he thinks he is the smartest guy in the room and has to have the last word.
Still is yet to show proof that his articles were plagiarized.
His site also has an article on using a "taboo" injecting protocol. That is how he can put 20 lbs on in a short time.
Post it.
Wait, no, you can't.
Negged again for lies.
Anonecho chamber
Article is no bueno. It is littered with logical fallacy. Articles do not in any way support his starting hypothesis, which has been plucked from gutters of forum trenches.
Abstract surfing is shit, but if you publish stuff like this and takes money from people that are not able to, or wont read for themselves.... well thats... more shit.
So the main point of the article androgen receptors down regulate which is then supported with a study that they fully do is shit how?, please provide proof androgen receptors do not down regulate at all on aas by providing a refuting study showing so many months on they are still upregulated. Thanks.
Negged for attempting to say that I have said androgen receptors do not downregulate. Sort yourself out and I will give your karma back.
Firstly, you take money from people, while purporting to be knowledgeable. You create a very badly written post like this, claiming it to be scientific.
Let me explain to you why it is not.
Your study is aimed at AAS Cycle users.
Hypothesis 1: "gains stop by week 6"
Evidence supplied = 0
Hypothesis 2: "no other cycle after that first cycle comes even close to comparison in results"
Evidence supplied = 0
Hypothesis 3: "But this effect isn’t only seen with the first cycle of anabolic steroid use. It’s also seen when users have a long lay off as well from anabolic steroid use."
Evidence supplied = 0
Research question: "What about week 4, week 5, week 6 etc"
Study 1: TRT users achieve a new homeostasis
Problem: supplied as evidence as an answer to what happens in "week 4, week 5, week 6 etc" despite it not being at suporaphysiological levels, and those not being on food or exercise regimes similar to Supra users.
Study2: Study demonstrates in hypogonadol men that AAS plus amino acids improve LBM and Strength over time.
Problem: Not relevant as direct evidence "we excluded subjects engaged in regular training"
Also; this can be used as evidence for an opposing hypothesis to your statement "even when they have poor training and dietary habits"
Problem: measurements taken at baseline and week 24 (measurements prove increases, prove differences in different aged people, and DO NOT prove anything re: week 4/5/6 etc. - if anything this is contrary to your hypotheses.
Study 3: oxandrolone only study, 20mg per day only.
problem: study of 60-80 yo men doing no resistance training
problem: Not a supra cycle
Problem: old men only
Problem: Doesnt address receptors
Of course... I could keep going....
Litterally a massive lack of comprehensive skills or some type of delusion where you have extreme selective reading.
You went back to literally all the same points where I used real world examples on real world effects... me stating random pro bodybuilder feels effects stop by week 6 and many users all across the internet and so on feel the same is just that... real world examples of peoples experiences. Nothing to do with data....
You have a massive massive selecting or delusion issue. If someone makes a statement they feel or see one thing this is a subjective experience. And guess what anyone is feel to state their subjective experience.
Me using real world subjective experiances to give real world depth and opinions is wrong how when i clearly state it as such. A real world experiance. Yet your delusions is reading it as. This guy is saying he has studies on pro bodybuilders gains stopping by week 6.
I've clearly said when things are experiances.. please take a step back and stop making things up in your head that nobody has said or argued. Your making up arguments nobody has said. And I've literally explained this in detail above. I pointed out in detail not making up anything but clearly fully stating things in a 100 percent truthful manner which you are 100 percent making up arguments that are fully factual.
Again ive stated clearly what the studies said not mistruding any single detail. I clearly said a study showed androgen receptor upregulation on intial use and by month 6 down regulation. Fully 100 percent factual as i posted. Nothing was said incorrect or wrong. And yet you twist this and make up a bunch of different false statements nobody said.
I listed the details of studies 100 percent to their facts while posting the parts talked on.
Then I go into statements how this can relate to real world experiances bodybuilders experiances and more.
So stating studies effects 100 percent to the T. And giving bodybuilder statements to a T has fallacies how. Literally making up arguements in your head nobody has said. Very high form of delusion going on in your mind sorry to say.
You have a issue with the studies not having a relation when my opinion was fully stated in detail.. yet you still like to make up arguements to the stranger in your head. Please refute back with studies opposing these studies.
Please provide a study showing the refuting claims to my opinions and the studies above statements.
1 androgen receptor content vs serum hormone levels effects on muscle growth.
2 how androgen receptor content doesn't matter in relation to aas use yet the study fully claimed there was only a anti catabolic effect seen by 6 month mark. Please show us data not just words on how this apparently does not have any relation to bodybuilders since it was just trt.
3 show us refuting data that if the anavar study data had of trained they would not of seen the decline in strength and size benefits come week 6.
4 please provide studies showing high levels of androgens keep androgen receptors upregulate the whole peroid as if that seems what you are trying to possibly claim since you mentioned it had importance. If not why make the claim just to make a random statement ?
5 already semi stated. Please provide scientific data how if men had trained it prevents androgen receptor down regulation as seen in other studies since this matters to you.
Because to me it seems you made alot of shit up thats not proven to just be like but but but what if what if what if. What if all the men had a super rare 0.001 androgen sensivity gene defect that caused them all to magically down regulste their receptors that doesn't take effect in normal men and their recpetors had they trained would of stayed up regulated.
Everything I've said in the article is fact. I quoted studies and said what the studies said fact.
I then quoted real world examples of peoples experiences in relation to what the studies have shown and how they can relate. Fact.
Someone's opinion on where the receptors might down regulate due to real world experiences when studies prove it is real is an opinion.
Yet your delsuional disorder seems to make it insane someone has an opinion and giving people examples of how things can relate by quoting studies word for word and adding real world examples and clearly stating rela world examples . Your making it seem like I said anywhere that the studies said what I said as my opinion. Again literal high class delusion making these things up in your head or a reading comphrension issue and cannot separate the study quotes vs opinions when clearly stated
And lastly on people hiring me. I didn't post this here. And my opinions have had multiple top 5 ifbb pros reach out to me and elite world class powerlifters hiring me like as seen on my site. Multiple powerlifters holding great titles upwards of first class placings and leaving me insanely great reviews. All over my opinions on ways to approach things which lead to results. But for some strange reason in your head my opinions based off real world experiences and studies makes it a issue people come out to me . Find me. Beg to hire me. Do hire me. And leave me immense thankful reviews.
Yes it seems like a massive issue that I charge people who beg for my time and immensely appreciate what I did for them. So to be clear. You have an issue that people seek to hire me want to pay me without me advertising all over just on my own platform. And them absolutely loving my services. You have a problem with people enjoying someone else's services they begged for and throughly thanked them for... again tell me what the issue is besides for your immense weird jealously and delusion it seems with not being able to separate opinions from proven facts and someone giving examples in relations to facts.
Okey dokey!!!
AnonWell let's see here brother...
Study 1 says they test after 1 month and then again after 6 months...so where does the author get the assumption that cycle gains peak at week 6 from? Certainly not from the results of the first study, because no tests were performed at 6 weeks. Tests were performed after 1 month and then again 6 months later according to the study. What was going on for months in-between wasn't tested.
Study 2 in the article includes study 1, it's literally listed in the sources at the bottom. So why didn't the author just post the second study since it includes the first study? Why the double posting? It's like the author has no experience cross referencing information or basic reading. And the author is quoting the results from these two links as if they are the results from two completely different studies. There is no study 1 and study 2, there is only 1 study about androgen receptor expression from month 1 to month 6. The author just lists two links about it and didn't know they were the same study.
If you open both study 1 and 2 and check the study authors at the top of the studies you see they are the same. And if you read the start of both studies you see they are the same studies, slightly worded differently.
Study 1: "We investigated the effects of 6 mo of near-physiological testosterone administration to older men on skeletal muscle function and muscle protein metabolism. Twelve older men"
Study 2: "The interaction between testosterone and exogenous amino acids was studied in older men before and after 6 months of testosterone administration. Twelve healthy older male subjects"
Study 1: "Twelve older men"
Study 2: "Twelve healthy older male subjects"
Same studies. Slightly worded differently. And the author of this bullshit articles BJ posted (no offense BJ) quotes both links as if they are two completely different studies! hahaha
The 3rd study is on oxandrolone aka Anavar. It's a study on Anavar. It is not a study on test C or Test E or anything used for TRT. It's a study on Anavar. Well, I do not run Anvar solo or for longer than 6 weeks. I add Anavar to the last 5 or 6 weeks of a cycle. But apparently in the mind of the dunce that authored this stupid article, this study demonstrating 90% of gains from an Anavar only cycle happen in the first 6 weeks of running Anavar means ALL anabolic steroids work exactly like an Anavar only cycle lol
The author equates the results of an Anavar only cycle to the results of all steroids, and the author does this without providing a single sources to substantiate such a crazy conclusion...
Everyone on Eroids knows, or should know, that all steroids do not work exactly like Anavar.
"Why does androgen receptor content matter more than the dose of an anabolic you take?"
This part of the article talks about the results of a study where NO STEROIDS WERE USED OR STUDIED AT ALL. And thus does not help support the author's stupid conclusion quoted below ↓
"Conclusion;
Keep your cycles short. This is why I suggest 6 week steroid cycles. Why stay on any longer and waste time for a mere 10 percent benefit when 90 percent of your strength and size gains are seen within the first 6 weeks. Staying on an extra 4 or 6 weeks for a 10 percent benefit when you could have had that time as off time to let your androgen receptors recover from the stimuli of anabolics. And then be back on cycle again by that time, for the immense gains in strength and muscle size anabolics are known for."-article author
The article is pure shit authored by an incompetent moron.
And that same moron just so happens to have the same name as the website where the article is published. Maybe, just maybe, had the article been submitted to a reputable website that proof reads articles before publishing them, then maybe it wouldn't have been published.
Also just to say it again after re reading I clearly stated my reasons for 6 weeks due to real world experiences and a study with more real world application. But if you had any type of comphrensive skills you would of been able to realize this was stated multiple times in multiple ways.
Hey Taeian,
Fella... what are comprehensive skills?
My articles are edited essentially off my rants with data providied. I hate editing and instead get others to wrap it up for me. There is more studies on this topic and I do see that the same study is mentioned twice vs mentioning the supporting data in 2 seperate parts.
As I said, I dislike editing or even proof reading/tideous work. I throw things together and I would never post it if I did not have someone else do it.
As to your points, Where does it show 6 weeks in the 6 month study. It doesnt nor was it claimed that said study said such... The study is in reference to that androgen receptors are upregulated and do down regulate come time on. Again to get this through to you since I already see how your brain works "if its not proven at said time frame its not proven at all"No it means its unknown. So to get this through again which you seemed to have totally not been able to comphrend. This study is supporting the fact that androgen receptors upregulate at the start. and downregulate after some time on. Not when.... But that they do. As the arguement for decades online has been androgen receptors only upregulate.. And there is ZERO down regulation. This study provides proof receptors down regulate. That is the main, and ONLY point. Not 6 weeks...
I just read over the article which I should of in the first place and evverything besides the couple mistakes there still holds true to my rant.
I stated... Androgen receptors being belived to only upregulate is false. As people only look at the intial use on studies and not tested further down the line... Hence the study posted, showed exactly what people knew, they upregulate, but ended with further testing showing they down regulate.
Putting to myth the end that androgens ONLY upregulate receptors. CLEARLY they only do for a certain peroid of time... That is not up for debate. So because of said error in supporting studies it makes the article or supporting studies bunk? Great logic there...
Now as the article states. We first prove androgen receptors do infact down regulate GREAT.... Then go on to explain how another study shows majority of the gains were within 6 weeks... GREAT, because the first study only shows retesting at 6 months.. Where did they down regulate? Let me guess.. in your mind 6 months.. Heres a tip, the fact it showed they downregulated at 6 months leaves it to be questioned that they could of downregulated anywhere from month 1 to month 6... Where was it exactly.. nobody knows. Hence why the article is here to point out as clearly stated... using real world results to HELP pin point with user findings and other studies on androgens. Hence the anavar study. Which btw... there is studies on testosterone enanthate as well showing large effects by week 3... Again like I said I didnt throw in every study because the article was written up by my rants/post.
So we take a study PROVING receptors down regulate as the main topic ending the myth they only upregulate and that makes the article bunk. Again great logic.
And then the study showing how androgen receptor content matters the most for muscle growth having no relation due to it wasnt a study with anabolics.... The study would not matter if anabolics were used or not... that wasnt the point of that section of the article... Again extremely little comphrensive skills here... That portion of the article is pointing out the fact that androgen receptor content vs serum androgen levels is the main factor in muscle growth out of the two... It is cross referencing the importance of androgen receptor effects in muscle growth vs serum levels. Which we can cross reference to the orginal study above showing how having androgen receptors downregulate only lead to an anti catabolic effect and not an anabolic effect in relation to muscle growth. Or let me guess, an anabolic effect from AAS doesnt aid muscle growth?
So please explain how the main part of this article, that androgen receptors DO down regulate has no merit and is shit? Your speaking out your ass to be frank and looking for any type of flaws vs the actual content presented/data.
The article proves androgen receptors do down regulate. And then is followed up with where can we look to see where it might down regulate in that 6 month time frame with real world results and other studies in a real world setting. So please tell me how spef stating real world results and real world setting of a study to help support when the down regulation might take place is also shit?
AnonLet's focus on an excerpt from your conclusion in the article:
"Keep your cycles short. This is why I suggest 6 week steroid cycles. Why stay on any longer and waste time for a mere 10 percent benefit when 90 percent of your strength and size gains are seen within the first 6 weeks."-taeian
This is incorrect and primarily based on an Anavar only study where 90% of gains were made in 6 weeks. Deca isn't even in full effect by 6 weeks. I've kept detailed cycles logs that I can look back on. I have experienced Deca gains not even begin to slow until after week 8. And there is other cycle options, such as stacking in another compound the last 6 weeks of a 12 week cycle to keep the gains coming.I have cycle logs where I have done this too and tracked my gains. In fact I did this on my last cycle with Anavar during the last 5 weeks and I added muscle mass and trimmed up at the same time. So I know you're wrong just by looking at my previous cycle logs. Many on this forum have run cycles where 90% gains did not come in the first 6 weeks of a cycle. The bottom line is your conclusion is wrong.
Yeah... I agree with you there! I too have made some great gains on the end of my 12 week cycle by switching compounds around week 6.
I'm going to be editing the article soon and including alot more studies I have. As I said I hate editing and tedious task and always let someone else do it based off my rants/post. Like I said I have many more studies and studies on like I mentioned here test e as well for those claiming long esters would be different and even emails from multiple researchers on spef study details.
Like I said as well its plausible that adding more androgens or higher doses or switching to more anabolic compounds will cause another surge in the receptors. My personal take on it. It does. However my personal opinion is just that an opinion hence why I always separate opinion from science. And to me something not proven is just that. Not proven but doesn't equat its fiction or fact. Too many are to soon to jump to its fiction if not proven. While no it means its unknown.
My personal experiances is adding more andeogens or stronger compounds equals a modest boost. Not as great as a peroid off. But does bring back the anabolic effect. Hence why even most my cycle suggestions mid cycle I like to give a minor boost in androgens as well anywyas. And if someone insist on staying on or for prep to try and recomp a minor bump every 3 to 4 or 6 weeks we do. Minor to have room to consistently bump.
Again ill be editing and adding a plethora of more studies even ones with author statements that majority of effects are the first month as example on long ester steroids.
Others jumped to conclusions to quickly here with the bullshit of if its not proven its fiction mindset due to pure ignorance. If you haven't seen a study proving something is real it means you do not know. Not that its untrue due to you not seeing such a study.
As the mega dose testosterone studies showed almost 20lbs gains that must mean stay on double and triple the time like many have and you'll.be up 60lbs lean right.. everyones a pro bodybuilder now. The sheer thought of this isnt how things work and peoples results should show this alone. Take the drugs see great benefit quickly and everyone stays on but where are the continual benefits. Its why I have so many great 6 week transformations and on long time users who had previously stalled.
Success leaves clues too i am a big fan of. The majority of actual professional bodybuildwrs who come off and swear by this vs the sheer amount of gym rats who do endless blast of 12 to 16 weeks and high cruises of even 500mg... non stop who look like they haven't even cycled in comparsion says alot for real world comparisons of the two as well. Of course also.everyone will throw on the genetic cards as they continue to do things they've always done and get the same results they've always gotten vs keeping a open mind and possibly listening to someone who has been where you want to be.
I’ll be looking forward to seeing that & sure some other people on here will check it too. Glad to see you on here; people will warm up to you once they get to know you and see what you’re about. At first it could seem like a Lions den over here! Lol... I know you’re a man of studies & not bro science. Thanks for taking the time to post & debate!
Great lets focus on my conclusion which is my opinion just as much as your so called detail logs are.
So you experiance gains well after 8 weeks. Great. Myself and countless others on online forums and pro bodybuilders who have used test e and deca cycles note the gains come to a complete halt almost by week 6.
So now you are bringing your personal anecdotal experience into this as your proof which I stated clearly on my side my anecdotal experiances and of others. So where's that leave us... you say gains continue and many others say they don't. Great opinion great talking to you ?
Since we're talking anecdotal experiances. Going by this you must be 300lbs lean by now right. Gains just keep coming so staying on long peroids a good 12 or 20 week cycle you must be gaining almost 20lbs lean mass each run like the bhasin study right. Sounds abit far fetched doesn't it.
But again I love how everything you've said is purely anecdotal. So we're gonna go only by pure anecdotal experiances then in gonna have to go with your conclusion is wrong based off my own experiances seeing immense weight gain the first few weeks and little there after. I'm gonna go with the endless forum post on any board when searching gains stop mid cycle. I'm gonna go with the endless pro bodybuilders who have felt via 20 years experience their gains stopped off season come week 6. I'm gonna go with the other guy in this thread who said he felt the same thing. I'm gonna go with the endless people I've known coached and my followers and alike who have upped their food intake immensely to see piss poor gains in comparsion to the first 6 weeks even on long esters the same long ester cycles dorian yates kevin levrone Shawn Ray and alike who used test e and deca for off season and felt gains went to shit after. I'm going to go with the doctors of the old when they use to rx these drugs stating the anabolic effects were short lived.
And after all my personal experiances and experiances of countless others. I'm going to go with the science on top of the anecdotal experiances showing that even with long esters majority of gains are seen. Go ahead email authors of the graded testosterone group study of test e s.bhasin because I have. And guess what. The majority of gains were not seen in the later half of the study. So s author of a study over 20weeks on long esters would also disagree with your findings.
So science and personal anecdotal experiances. Vs your personal experiance. Awesome. Great chat. I'll stick with the weight of the evidence like science does. And the weight science wise is on my conclusion.
Edit.
Also lets try not to make shit up like the last guy. No need to make up arguements in your head your opponent didn't say to try and make yourself look better. Such as acting like I said you could not add more androgens to continue to grow. I never said that wasn't plausible but when you don't really have a point its easier to make something up someone didn't disagree with but act like they did right ?
Also I don't talk of the unknown as fact or fiction unlike you are and the other fella. Would adding more androgens allow one to continue to grow? Its not a yes or a no. We don't have any factual proof. Hence I never disagreed or said wasnt possible so please try to keep on topic and on track here without putting assumptions into my post or my words. Thanks.
Secondly. Just because a drug doesn't peak till later on doesnt mean its not working... so because say test has a 4 day half life means its not really working till week 4... lol.... a drug building up has nothing to do when its working when you inject x5 the phsyiological doses. And as I stated above there is studies on lower doses test e showing to have strength and size gains by a large portion by week 3... so again science beats you there once again. Like I said there's alot more studies on this alot... and study author comments.
AnonDon't pretend to be objective. The way you debate makes it clear you grab onto what subjectively appeals to you. And you are backpedaling. Your conclusion was wrong.
Literally replied to every single point you made your very anedotal backed reply.... and all I get is a cop out reply. Well thanks for accepting defeat I suppose.
1 didn't grab onto anything as you stated very spef statements and I replied with very spef in relation to your statement comment.
2 back pedaling. Awesome vague remark. Always great when losing a debate to make random vague remarks or attacks.
Conclusion is wrong to you based off your personal experiances which doesn't appear to be much. Vs science and a plethora of others experiances and some who have been doing such for decades.
Realize the weight on your evidence which is purely your personal experiance is severly under value here
AnonSorry for the late reply. Busy day.
I was reading and see you said you are going to be updating your article, I think that is good.
When you talked about anecdotal reports online of cycle gains halting at 6 weeks I think you should take into account some possible reasons for that:
1, Improper dosing of an AI could halt gains.
2, Changing to a new vial that is bunk could halt gains.
And often those making these reports online are looking for answers because they don't know why their gains have halted.
I can appreciate the effort you put forth, even though I disagree with some of your debating tactics. And I still do not agree with your conclusion. I do not take any of this personal.
To all the variables of gains halting. There could be a million reasons obv gains halt. But those are all what if"s". We could list what if for days. Hence my take on the anecdotal experiances when there is purely just to many saying such and my own personal experiances which you have given your personal experiances. And mine have been out of no where gains stop with zero other changes and then going to extremes with food to barely gain an extra lb here and there as I would finish.
My experiances on myself, clients followers friends and more have always been the same. And have always concided with the studies above..which again there is many more but I also spef left out animal studies of course too. I still remember my first cycle till this day. Test and deca. I gained 28lbs by week 5 it was i remember. Each week I was so amazed at my progress and then I remember after that 5th week not seeing much gain. I then proceeded to pound back extra eggs and weight gainers and milk and more. While still maintaining my prior diet. I remember to this day every aspect of that first cycle seeing those amazing results and it halting and my mind going what the hell is going on. And eating eating eating to end the cycle with a couple lbs more if that to the 12th week and being so disappointed with the gains past week 5. So my personal experiance my first long ester cycle too. No more gains out of no where with no other variables... again were using a anecdotal here right.
And same with every cycle there after. Id start one see gains and try and continue on the same cycle never reslly coming off and never seeing much progress.
And I can put every single bit of muscle I gained down to a couple cycles and still remember them all in detail. I've been 110lbs over my starting weight and they were all due to just a couple cycles. Yet.. I spent years on cycles...
My first cycle 28lbs. 150 to 170 range kept. 2nd cycle to about 200lbs. Stayed on for months. Didn't progress. Finally gave up. Off for a good while there then start up again bam up to 230lbs right away first 4 weeks. Stayed after this one basically for almost couple years id say. Never really changing. Then took a big break after here and restarted again. This time it was my lowest dose cycle ever. Deca was only 400mg a week. I was 200 and something pounds here. Within 6 weeks I had regained my 30lbs muscle loss. Muscle memory.. which is no feat obv muscle memory comes quick and I've always regained everything basically in a couple weeks max. I regained that lost 30lbs and gained another 22 new lbs all within 6 weeks to 252 my highest weight ever within 6 weeks again.
So again were going by experiances here and these are my experiances. And this is obv all subjective. But my ecperiances friends clients and more always the exact same thing. See people explode if they had time off then completely stop gaining all wbile pounding back more food and no other variables.
I have my pics each cycle and I remember them all so in detail due to the fact always thinking that. Why can't I keep gaining like such. And big part of reason my clients see same results. I tell.them right off the bat how it goes and encourage them to stay on longer just to prove to tbem how much they'll waste their time. And its always the same thing. Hey man you were right not gaining since said week. Which fyi they'll all tell you even on long esters tbey stopped seeing massive gains by week 4 actually.. and even going to week 6 is kinda a stretch. And why I also make my clients now do live videos for before and afters. Live so its time stamped when they started how they look and after.
So thats my anecdotal experiances and why I so heavily placed in my writing whats anecdotal... I'm not trying to hide any shades over anyone. I'm making it clear whats what. Whats experiances of countless otbers and then putting the science there is as to why. So to me considering those variables when I lived it is nothing to my experiances. My ai didn't change. Never used one later one. My gear was later one was always home brew so my batch of powder in same bag was the same gear. I lived it. And came to realize most everyone else does to and just how many pros said the same. And to me its silly to think all these pros who have more experiance then anyone anywhere ever will. Would have such skewed vsriables. These are people who have tried it all for decades. And they felt the same way.
So my personal experiances is that. And I put the science as to why. I even re emailed shalander from the testosterone 600mg 20 week study so I can screen shot his reply on when majority of the gains were. And as I said there is more studies too.
My question always comes to. Where are all these gains then if steroids work for so long and receptors don't down regulate. Stay on keep gaining. But the reality shows us that anti catabolic effect of 10 percent more beenfit is just that. Hence why nobody keeps gaining. And as to when gsins shut off. Well we see in the anavr study gains were magic for doing nothing. That's steroids that's how powerful steroids are. Just like the testosterone studies no working out.. there magic.. to a point then they stop working. Why is it no training can cause immense gains with steroids. More dose more gains. Steroids are magic... magic till their not... down regulation.
Clearly it happens. So of its debated on when. Well lot guys would be alot bigger if they could get those gains up to 16 weeks.. i mean testosyerone studies show almost 20lbs or 10lbs almost not even training more is better right ? So again as to when for long esters thats where I mix real world experisnces with the studies we have and the studies on long esters arent in the article but the biggest gains in strength and size was actually before 6 weeks a fyiwhich will be one of ones ill upload.
Anonlol ok. You're wrong and I'm not interested in reading your book.
Great reply as with all other replies you've made.
Keep stating I'm wrong but with ZERO backing or scientific backing at that as well.
1, androgens receptors have been proven to down regulate after time on AAS. If debating that show the proof with studies they do not down regulate after time on.
So far from you and buddy its only been replies of. Your wrong, and no scientific backing as to why or any type of argument.
Studies show long esters have peak effects beginning few weeks on strength and size, studies on orals show a grinding massive halt by week 6. Studies show androgen receptors after even further time on were literally at baseline.
These are the facts Ive stated. And they are all correct. And I stated them clearly. And the best you've got is your wrong. Awesome scientific debate.