Receptor saturation and gains

[fixxer]

This is just my two cents based on common sense.

Every medication you take you build a certain tolerance to. Why would AAS be different? Lets look at this:

Ever taken high amounts of caffeine? After a while it stops working so well and you have to come off for a little while. When you get back on it again, bang! Magically works again. Same with pain killers. Same with any drug you put into your body.

Ask yourself this: Why is it when you first started doing cycles you grew like a weed off 500mg test only. But now you are taking a gram of test 800mg of EQ some tren and orals and seeing just a little improvement. After a while the body will get used to almost anything. This is also why I hate to see some kid 20-25 dosing test at 4 grams a week. Do you really think these guys will be able to go back to 500-600mg per week and get good results?

Androgen Receptors Downregulate - Don't They? Part 2
by Bryan Haycock.

In part 1 of this article we discussed the mistake of thinking about androgen receptors (testosterone receptors) in the same way we think of other receptors such as beta-receptors. Beta-receptors down regulate in response to beta-adrenergic stimulation whereas there is good evidence that androgen receptors increase in numbers in response to androgens. We also discussed the various affects of testosterone on muscle growth. Testosterone does far more than simply increase the rate of protein synthesis!

It's a hard thing to try to argue the "growing like a weed off 500mg, but now you are taking a gram of test and seeing just a little improvement" theory. A lot of it may be due to inadequate training/eating/etc. There are too many variables. I don't want this thread to turn into another one of those threads because we can literally go in circles. That's not what this thread is about. This thread is about receptor talk, so please take that elsewhere.


Great posts, SAD. Those were good reads. The author flat out states that per any given dose there is a theoretical upper limit as to the mass it can maintain:

Androgen Receptors Downregulate - Don't They? Part 2
by Bryan Haycock

Maintenance of the kind of muscle mass seen in top-level bodybuilders today requires a given level of androgens in the body. That level will vary from individual to individual depending on their genetics. Nevertheless, if the androgen level drops, or if they were to "cycle off" the absolute level of lean mass will also drop. Likewise, as the level of androgens goes up, so will the level of lean mass that individual will be able to maintain. All of this happens without any evidence of AR down regulation. More accurately it demonstrates a relationship between the amount of androgens in the blood stream and the amount of lean mass that you can maintain. This does not mean that all you need is massive doses to get huge. Recruitment of satellite cells and increased myonucleation requires consistent "effective" training, massive amounts of food, and most importantly, time. Start out with reasonable doses. Then, as you get bigger you can adjust your doses upwards.

This seems wild to me, but also makes some sort of sense at the same time. For some reason I lean towards disagreeing with it, but obviously I have no concrete data to back that up.

 

[SAD]

Great posts, SAD. Those were good reads. The author flat out states that per any given dose there is a theoretical upper limit as to the mass it can maintain:



This seems wild to me, but also makes some sort of sense at the same time. For some reason I lean towards disagreeing with it, but obviously I have no concrete data to back that up.

Which part seems wild? That a drop in androgens will be followed by a drop in absolute level of lean mass (assuming the individual is past his/her genetic max)? What are you disagreeing with? I have a feeling that your thought is that when 500mgs/test no longer induces growth, changing the training regimen and/or upping calories will kickstart the gains again. I agree with that up to a certain level of LBM, but beyond that (and I'm not there yet so this is not from personal experience, just postulating) I agree with the author that there needs to be a given number of androgens present to compliment the increased muscle mass. If I am not inferring what you mean correctly, my apologies, I wouldn't want to ruffle anymore delicate feathers today.

 

[DLTH]

I"ve never known what to believe about receptor burnout/saturation and all that B.S. Seems like everybody just posts "bro science" regarding that issue. I've heard DNP can help clear out receptors though, anybody have any input on that?

 

[IronInsanity]

Where's Glycomann???

 

[ajdos]

This is just my two cents based on common sense.

Every medication you take you build a certain tolerance to. Why would AAS be different? Lets look at this:

Ever taken high amounts of caffeine? After a while it stops working so well and you have to come off for a little while. When you get back on it again, bang! Magically works again. Same with pain killers. Same with any drug you put into your body.

Ask yourself this: Why is it when you first started doing cycles you grew like a weed off 500mg test only. But now you are taking a gram of test 800mg of EQ some tren and orals and seeing just a little improvement. After a while the body will get used to almost anything. This is also why I hate to see some kid 20-25 dosing test at 4 grams a week. Do you really think these guys will be able to go back to 500-600mg per week and get good results?

First reason is AAS are hormones, they are signalers.
Secondly as the second article was saying its not the same as something like caffeine or clen which can downregulate.
And yes I think they will be able to go back to lower doses and get good results.
I have seen that with my own 2 eyeballs, most people take way too much.
Their biggest problem is the body is being told to rev up protein synthesis and smaller guys dont have the cappacity to absorb, assimilate, and grow much more protein than x amount, their is a rate limiting factor there, and lots of these dummies never eat enough to start with , if they had they would probably have opted out of taking AAS because they would have been growing from day 1.
If there is any 'tolerance' per say I would have to say its a very negligable amount.

 

[Qwerty1424]

well said ^^^

 

[SHINE]

My personal opinion is that gains stall from myostatin and SHBG build-up, along with complacency in diet and training (i.e. not adjusting to the fact that you have gained XX pounds and strength), not from androgen receptors being saturated or down-regulating.

This article shows that myostatin levels drop slowing gains after 8 weeks but come back up during longer cycles, (thanks to ol Ulter) nice find.

http://www.theironden.com/articles/1634-why-your-cycle-stalls-week-8-more.html

 

[fixxer]

Which part seems wild? That a drop in androgens will be followed by a drop in absolute level of lean mass (assuming the individual is past his/her genetic max)? What are you disagreeing with? I have a feeling that your thought is that when 500mgs/test no longer induces growth, changing the training regimen and/or upping calories will kickstart the gains again. I agree with that up to a certain level of LBM, but beyond that (and I'm not there yet so this is not from personal experience, just postulating) I agree with the author that there needs to be a given number of androgens present to compliment the increased muscle mass. If I am not inferring what you mean correctly, my apologies, I wouldn't want to ruffle anymore delicate feathers today.

It's pretty clear what I'm on the fence about. The fact that a certain amount of test, e.g. 300mg maintains a certain amount of muscle aka has an upper limit. If you were to reach the absolute max at 500mg and then dropped to 300mg, you would then lose a predetermined and calculated amount of muscle.

Wouldn't it be interesting to know how much muscle is the upper limit of 300mg? I think it would definitely put things in perspective for many people in regards to the amounts of testosterone they actually use.

 

[ketsugo]

which part seems wild? That a drop in androgens will be followed by a drop in absolute level of lean mass (assuming the individual is past his/her genetic max)? What are you disagreeing with? I have a feeling that your thought is that when 500mgs/test no longer induces growth, changing the training regimen and/or upping calories will kickstart the gains again. I agree with that up to a certain level of lbm, but beyond that (and i'm not there yet so this is not from personal experience, just postulating) i agree with the author that there needs to be a given number of androgens present to compliment the increased muscle mass. If i am not inferring what you mean correctly, my apologies, i wouldn't want to ruffle anymore delicate feathers today.

lmao im with you today , im going to check for a fever and post later

 

[ketsugo]

Wouldn't it be interesting to know how much muscle is the upper limit of 300mg? I think it would definitely put things in perspective for many people in regards to the amounts of testosterone they actually use.

iT WOULD BUT EVERYONE IS DIFFERENT

 

[ketsugo]

where's glycomann???

dont know but adjos knows his shit too

 

[ketsugo]

The previous two articles were FISTed from Meso. Wanted to give credit where credit is due, not just to the authors, but to Millard as well for his part in educating our community. These articles enlightened me when I was under the impression that ARs downregulate.


My personal opinion is that gains stall from myostatin and SHBG build-up, along with complacency in diet and training (i.e. not adjusting to the fact that you have gained XX pounds and strength), not from androgen receptors being saturated or down-regulating.

sHEESH - IM WITH YA HERE TOO, IM CHECKIN MYSELF IN LOL