+ 1 Pharmacology of anabolic steroids - study
I was looking around and found this study on steroids that seems rather thorough and interesting for anyone wanting to learn a bit more about how these things work, and hopefully help dispel some of the bro science that runs rampant.
It touches many issues like the different pathways through which anabolic steroids work, where the anabolic/androgenic scores come from and why they're not necessarily the most reliable figures for our practical purposes, how the idea that a steroid binds to the androgen receptor and starts protein synthesis is a gross oversimplification and there are many other other substances involved in this process (which can alter the effect of the steroid-receptor complex on the actual DNA), etc. It's pretty extensive and I haven't thoroughly read through all of it, but I thought I'd share.
There's also one particular segment that drew my attention, which is that rats on a protein-free diet gained muscle mass when administered anabolic steroids. The anabolic effect is such that it can in fact cause muscle cells to scavenge amino acids from the rest of the body to build new skeletal muscle tissue. This is just one more stab at that silly idea that you need a calorie surplus and a very high protein intake to build muscle (note that I'm not saying that it doesn't help make things happen faster).
So here it is, enjoy:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2439524/
- Bookmark
- 1
- 0
bigurielI knew my observation would attract "attention" lol
Relax, I'm well aware that you're not going to be building muscle muscle mass without eating plenty, I was just pointing out that the mechanism does exist. Remember that your body "wastes" a lot of aminoacids, converting them to glucose and burning them up for fuel for instance, if a steroid stops that process and instead uses them to build more lean tissue sounds great to me.
But that was just a small personal remark and not the point of my post. I actually found this study while I was looking for more information on the pharmacokinetics of orals. Studies on that are ridiculously difficult to find, you'd think there would be a lot of them published especially from the anti-doping controls which have to assess detection times and concentrations, but no. For the record so far I've gathered that orals typically peak in blood anywhere between 2.5 and 6 hours post administration, and biological half life can vary anywhere between about 8 hours (for anadrol) to 18 (for methylstenbolone).
These untrained rats are not moving tons of iron day in a day out. After I get done with a session of moving 50tons of iron I have created a lot of muscle trauma. They only way I'll be able to build new tissue as a result of that trauma is if I flood my system with protein (nitrogen) and lots of cals. If not, I will start regressing instead of progressing.
interesting study.
not saying your wrong when you mention a "stab at that silly idea that you need a calorie surplus and a very high protein intake to build muscle".
but like you said its a very complex process. these rats are untrained indiviuals, meaning they arnt bodybuilders or powerlifters. steroids in untrained humans will trigger growth without any added stimulus (working out) to the muscles as well. when you are an experienced bodybuilder or powerlifter (as someone using steroids should be), its not as simple as take steroids and grow. your body has adapted to intense workloads and more nutrients to sustain that.
thats the problem with most studies done regarding training, diet, or gear. they are all performed on untrained indivuals or rats. there are studies where guys gain 12% added mass to quads doing 5 sets of leg press at 80% of 1rm and drink 20g whey after. that doesnt mean my next leg day is gonna be 5 sets of legpress and 20g whey, they got results because they had not regularly trained for any period of time. these types of studies dont have great applications to real world people who are highly trained.
also regarding the protein free rats it states "anabolic effect proceeding at the expense of catabolic processes in other organs" which doesnt sounds great to me.
just my 2 cents brother. studies are great and can help us learn alot that is true, but they are not ALWAYS 100% applicable. doesnt mean they arnt worth reading or sharing.
thanks for the read brother.