Androgen receptor down-regulation and its effects on muscle growth. Short vs Long Cycles.

[Elvia1023]

wont let me attach files, maybe not enough post? whats your FB handle, my biggest is on video np sending. Im not a monster.. But all my results have been from a handful of 4-6 week periods of cycles/cycles every single time. And my very last run at my biggest weight where I had went 22lbs over using the least amount of gear gaining almost 2 inches on my arms and keeping within that 6 week period is enough for me to have seen my body do this every single time after a break. And my clients results have shown the same effects. Dont judge my results but I can show you np. Judge my clients 6 weeks results which I have np posting also who are even bigger then me. Im not a dedicated person, Im a person whos ran cycles and taken year breaks off everything. Which says a lot for the magic results steroids have produced after time off.

But judge actual bodybuilders results who've tried my method as these are the fellas you guys keep mentioning right,old, non athletes don't have any merit am I right?Or am I wrong now.

You seem to have overcomplicated everything (getting it wrong in the process). Don't you realize what you post about gaining on cycle is totally normal. Have someone off aas and give them 50mg dbol daily for 6 weeks with food and training and if they don't put 20 pounds on they seriously messed up. Plus you act like your gains were somehow different/special and you kept them all. It's nonsense. People keep gains if they still eat and do things to keep gains. It's a very simple process. Even if you gain a decent amount of real muscle tissue on gear if most people if they come off and don't train and eat crap will lose that muscle tissue. It doesn't matter hoew good their cycle or system was for gaining if they stop it will eventually disappear. Now it's different if it's held for many years but that's an entirely different subject. There are 1001 variables to how much they will maintain or lose but this is all such simple stuff.

I don't care about bodybuilders. I could get 100 bodybuilders and put them all on 20 week cycles with no breaks and give them a basic diet and tell them to train hard and give them a cycle. Every single one of them will look good at the end of their cycle if they follow the advice. It's not rocket science and is very simple. That doesn't prove anything. I could do the same and put them on a a few short cycles and guess what they will look good at the end of it. Some of them will make incredible gains and some will make good gains. If someone follows a plan 100% as long as it's not retarded they will look good. Even if it is a retarded plan some will even still look good at the end because they trained and put drugs into their system.

I don't care if you look incredible or standard I just like to see how someone looks. Half of the guys who come here with this type of talk usually look like a standard gym goer. If someone says they know how to get people in shape and they love nutrition and bodybuilding I expect them to look like it. You don't have to be Phil Heath but I just like people who practice what they preach. So when you make claims like 22 pounds over your heaviest weight ever you are trying to impress so that's why I asked for pics. If you look great then good for you. But anyone can put 22 pounds on in a short cycle especially if they didn't weigh much to begin with. I have put on 22 pounds of weight and looked much leaner at the same time in just a few wees before. Obviously it wasn't real muscle (water in the right places) but that's what happens when you come off gear and and go back on especially if muscle memory is also a factor. Anyone on this forum could do the same and it's nothing special.

 

[b-boy]

Arthur L. Rea
Building the perfect beast, great book, I've owned for years.

Short cycles are awesome, im a huge fan and prefer to do my off season cycles in such a fashion.
Contest prep is another story, but I'm not looking for continuous growth and more interested in the anti catabolic effect.

 

[Taeian clark]

You seem to have overcomplicated everything (getting it wrong in the process). Don't you realize what you post about gaining on cycle is totally normal. Have someone off aas and give them 50mg dbol daily for 6 weeks with food and training and if they don't put 20 pounds on they seriously messed up. Plus you act like your gains were somehow different/special and you kept them all. It's nonsense. People keep gains if they still eat and do things to keep gains. It's a very simple process. Even if you gain a decent amount of real muscle tissue on gear if most people if they come off and don't train and eat crap will lose that muscle tissue. It doesn't matter hoew good their cycle or system was for gaining if they stop it will eventually disappear. Now it's different if it's held for many years but that's an entirely different subject. There are 1001 variables to how much they will maintain or lose but this is all such simple stuff.

I don't care about bodybuilders. I could get 100 bodybuilders and put them all on 20 week cycles with no breaks and give them a basic diet and tell them to train hard and give them a cycle. Every single one of them will look good at the end of their cycle if they follow the advice. It's not rocket science and is very simple. That doesn't prove anything. I could do the same and put them on a a few short cycles and guess what they will look good at the end of it. Some of them will make incredible gains and some will make good gains. If someone follows a plan 100% as long as it's not retarded they will look good. Even if it is a retarded plan some will even still look good at the end because they trained and put drugs into their system.

I don't care if you look incredible or standard I just like to see how someone looks. Half of the guys who come here with this type of talk usually look like a standard gym goer. If someone says they know how to get people in shape and they love nutrition and bodybuilding I expect them to look like it. You don't have to be Phil Heath but I just like people who practice what they preach. So when you make claims like 22 pounds over your heaviest weight ever you are trying to impress so that's why I asked for pics. If you look great then good for you. But anyone can put 22 pounds on in a short cycle especially if they didn't weigh much to begin with. I have put on 22 pounds of weight and looked much leaner at the same time in just a few wees before. Obviously it wasn't real muscle (water in the right places) but that's what happens when you come off gear and and go back on especially if muscle memory is also a factor. Anyone on this forum could do the same and it's nothing special.

I said I have no problem showing pics. I said send me your FB handle or something whatever you use to send pics over. I cant attach files. Like I said you wanna see sure, np there is one moderately recent one on FB but it was after a long break and couple days back in the gym as its titled, use that as reference if you want up to you. I offered, offer still there.

I get what you saying. however how many guys complain and struggle and don't look good at the end of the cycle or just how many don't have the results they want. look how many guys here so far have said they noticed gains really slow down even when they upped their calories. are they wrong in their experiences?

People who don't see results they want after trying really hard staying on super long cycles, can see better results coming off is my point. And its better for them health wise....
I posted studies and data proving receptors down regulate. Same studies proving the anabolic effects of steroids are due to this response.. That says a lot. The real world data from masses, from pros,now from studies.Being arguedwith just opinions, well then congrats you have your opinion I have mine. And I am stating fully what I am basing my opinion off is all.

Shoot me pm where you'd like to have me send the pics if curious I have np.

 

[Taeian clark]

Arthur L. Rea
Building the perfect beast, great book, I've owned for years.

Short cycles are awesome, im a huge fan and prefer to do my off season cycles in such a fashion.
Contest prep is another story, but I'm not looking for continuous growth and more interested in the anti catabolic effect.

Yup,And all I am doing is putting more faces to the method and SCIENCE which L rea etc didn't have back then. I found the research and putting more credit to it. I don't see why everyone is getting upset over a method with science and endless amounts of large fellas and pros backing it. It is like they think the only way to get massive is via long cycles and that short cycles produce less gains based off zero data.

 

[Elvia1023]

I said I have no problem showing pics. I said send me your FB handle or something whatever you use to send pics over. I cant attach files. Like I said you wanna see sure, np there is one moderately recent one on FB but it was after a long break and couple days back in the gym as its titled, use that as reference if you want up to you. I offered, offer still there.

I get what you saying. however how many guys complain and struggle and don't look good at the end of the cycle or just how many don't have the results they want. look how many guys here so far have said they noticed gains really slow down even when they upped their calories. are they wrong in their experiences?

People who don't see results they want after trying really hard staying on super long cycles, can see better results coming off is my point. And its better for them health wise....
I posted studies and data proving receptors down regulate. Same studies proving the anabolic effects of steroids are due to this response.. That says a lot. The real world data from masses, from pros,now from studies.Being arguedwith just opinions, well then congrats you have your opinion I have mine. And I am stating fully what I am basing my opinion off is all.

Shoot me pm where you'd like to have me send the pics if curious I have np.

99% of those people don't get the results they want because of their nutrition. They may have been pleased with the added fullness going on AAS will cause in the first few weeks but it's deceiving. It's not because they didn't do a few short cycles that they weren't pleased it's because they weren't consistent in all areas over the long run. Most of those people get results with coaches simply because they start being more consistent because they have paid for advice and not because they run 6 weeks of test instead of 16. Trust me I am a big fan of short cycles and as I posted they have merit especially when trying to gain muscle. I think they are even be superior so I am in no arguing with that statement. However you make it sound as if long term cycles are just a complete waste due to androgen receptor down regulation and it's simply not the case. There are so many ways people can carry on gaining long into a cycle.

 

[Elvia1023]

Yup,And all I am doing is putting more faces to the method and SCIENCE which L rea etc didn't have back then. I found the research and putting more credit to it. I don't see why everyone is getting upset over a method with science and endless amounts of large fellas and pros backing it. It is like they think the only way to get massive is via long cycles and that short cycles produce less gains based off zero data.

As I just posted my point is both ways can work. You are the one that makes it sound as if any other way is a waste of time and it's definitely not the case. Anyway I am out of this thread as I have wasted too much time as it is.

 

[Taeian clark]

As I just posted my point is both ways can work. You are the one that makes it sound as if any other way is a waste of time and it's definitely not the case. Anyway I am out of this thread as I have wasted too much time as it is.

Aboslutely, hence why I said carefully two options there there. About not getting results they want, one might be due to poor diet training another might be due to what others here have expressed... eating more but gains still halt.

And absolutely at least I am honest with my bias I do think staying on longer is a large waste of time, not complete. But a large absolutely. that is my experience and that is many experiences as well as many pros. I am stating my side. And backing it with science, studies. What is wrong with that?

Leaving my last response to yours out of respect.

 

[zee-man]

I don't buy 6 weeks for optimal muscle growth, I'm sorry.

The first 2-3 weeks your body is balancing the new hormones and your muscles are filling with more than typical glycogen and water. That leaves 3 weeks of growth. I'm not sure about anyone else, but my lifts don't go up 40+lbs in 3 weeks and if it does, you weren't pushing yourself and training properly beforehand, that or you're a newbie.

What happens after 6 weeks when you return on trt? Are those measurements staying the same, is your bodyweight the same? I'm willing to bet not, it wasn't for me. You keep some, but not everything. I bet strength goes back down too because now your muscles are smaller from loss of glycogen and water, your leverages are worse for lifting the same weight as a result.

The only muscle gained will be the difference of your weight post-cycle. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but steroids do not increase the rate at which a muscle cell grows, only the amount of protein it can synthesize. So you will recover faster as you get nutrients faster, but not get the cells to themselves work faster.

Why doesn't down-regulation occur on trt? Its either an optimal amount or guys are running values that aren't true trt but almost beginner cycle levels. If down-regulation was a thing, it should be seen with any external hormone use.


The only way to prove that muscle gains were optimal at a certain duration is a dexa scan pre and post run. Measurements are too easily affected by external factors as is weight lifted.

 

[Taeian clark]

I don't buy 6 weeks for optimal muscle growth, I'm sorry.

The first 2-3 weeks your body is balancing the new hormones and your muscles are filling with more than typical glycogen and water. That leaves 3 weeks of growth. I'm not sure about anyone else, but my lifts don't go up 40+lbs in 3 weeks and if it does, you weren't pushing yourself and training properly beforehand, that or you're a newbie.

What happens after 6 weeks when you return on trt? Are those measurements staying the same, is your bodyweight the same? I'm willing to bet not, it wasn't for me. You keep some, but not everything. I bet strength goes back down too because now your muscles are smaller from loss of glycogen and water, your leverages are worse for lifting the same weight as a result.

The only muscle gained will be the difference of your weight post-cycle. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but steroids do not increase the rate at which a muscle cell grows, only the amount of protein it can synthesize. So you will recover faster as you get nutrients faster, but not get the cells to themselves work faster.

Why doesn't down-regulation occur on trt? Its either an optimal amount or guys are running values that aren't true trt but almost beginner cycle levels. If down-regulation was a thing, it should be seen with any external hormone use.


The only way to prove that muscle gains were optimal at a certain duration is a dexa scan pre and post run. Measurements are too easily affected by external factors as is weight lifted.

Thanks for the reply, your reply is obv purely your personal opinion not science backed.

My opinion and experiences have been what I gain is what I keep. I gain 22lbs this cycle, I keep it. So to me it wasn't glycogen or water when I am barely training if at all and I am holding my weight and size minus 1 or 2lbs... But again this is my experience which I am sharing as you are sharing yours.

I like many who have always experienced this just now have the science to back it.

 

[Samson250]

This guy has come at us so wrong. 57+ posts and two threads in 10-12 hours. I don’t agree or disagree with his science I’m just completely turned off by what he’s doing. You will never win the day to day members like over in your ideas I didn’t even read the insulin manifesto. He came on to strong and at this point I’m just hoping he goes away gracefully never to return and doesn’t clog up this board I love with pissing matches and veiled advertising.
That’s just my opinion though it’s not backed up by science.

 

[Taeian clark]

This guy has come at us so wrong. 57+ posts and two threads in 10-12 hours. I don’t agree or disagree with his science I’m just completely turned off by what he’s doing. You will never win the day to day members like over in your ideas I didn’t even read the insulin manifesto. He came on to strong and at this point I’m just hoping he goes away gracefully never to return and doesn’t clog up this board I love with pissing matches and veiled advertising.
That’s just my opinion though it’s not backed up by science.

Thanks for your opinion. But my orginal account was on here long before most of you actually. Nor am I advertising anything. Thanks though. I am however sharing info that many have gotten wrong over the years and myths. And many are enjoying it expect for the few of you stuck in your ways ignorant to science.

But again thanks for your opinion.

 

[MyNameIsJeff]

Just keep saying 'Science' over and over again. It's totally an effective argument. No matter that you have no education and look like you have a below average IQ. You are a moderately talented bullshit artist who peddles pseudoscience for a living.

 

[emeric delczeg]

I don't buy 6 weeks for optimal muscle growth, I'm sorry.

The first 2-3 weeks your body is balancing the new hormones and your muscles are filling with more than typical glycogen and water. That leaves 3 weeks of growth. I'm not sure about anyone else, but my lifts don't go up 40+lbs in 3 weeks and if it does, you weren't pushing yourself and training properly beforehand, that or you're a newbie.

What happens after 6 weeks when you return on trt? Are those measurements staying the same, is your bodyweight the same? I'm willing to bet not, it wasn't for me. You keep some, but not everything. I bet strength goes back down too because now your muscles are smaller from loss of glycogen and water, your leverages are worse for lifting the same weight as a result.

The only muscle gained will be the difference of your weight post-cycle. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but steroids do not increase the rate at which a muscle cell grows, only the amount of protein it can synthesize. So you will recover faster as you get nutrients faster, but not get the cells to themselves work faster.

Why doesn't down-regulation occur on trt? Its either an optimal amount or guys are running values that aren't true trt but almost beginner cycle levels. If down-regulation was a thing, it should be seen with any external hormone use.


The only way to prove that muscle gains were optimal at a certain duration is a dexa scan pre and post run. Measurements are too easily affected by external factors as is weight lifted.

You need to keep training hard and eat, all the time and you will grow, not just when you on the 6 weeks, there is study conducted in Russia on Olympic weight lifters, ( I did posted a few years back, maybe 5 years ago) shortly, the study demonstrated that after 6 weeks taking dianabol all athletes lost sensitivity to androgen. I never toke dianabol only test, and I speak from my own experiment , my short cycles where and still 8 weeks max, however I never went off totally of the test use, 8 week 280mg / week, and 8 weeks 70mg / week, this when I was competing, now 8 weeks 70mg/ week and 8 weeks 40mg /week. Also I was always incorporating FGF (fibroblast growth factors) which are acting as ligand to the receptors, I have only demonstrated the effect of the FGF on the CBD receptors, I am not interested to spend money to demonstrate that it also act on the androgen receptors. Peace to everybody.

 

[MightyJohn]

Short cycle theories have been discussed on this board for over a decade

 

[Taeian clark]

Just keep saying 'Science' over and over again. It's totally an effective argument. No matter that you have no education and look like you have a below average IQ. You are a moderately talented bullshit artist who peddles pseudoscience for a living.

Again thanks for you random opinion of adding no actual value or points to your arguement. Great bullshit artist for sure who has had elite world class lifters leave me immensely thankful reviews. I suppose my bullshit really gave them great placebo gains.

Win win for me I suppose. Who are you again? Because seems alot of fellas who look the part and lived it are also replying in agreement.

How long till the next of you post the same arguement of your wrong with zero logic proof or well anything. Thanks again.

 

[Creation]

Ok so. 12.5mcg is shutting yourself down and essentially making yourself hypothyroid. So worsening gains.

Now everyone has thyroid hormone receptor sensivity just like insulin receptor sensivity and androgens. And t3 monotherapy aka no t4 showed 25mcg to be normal was too low dose for many. So I do find 37.5 to 50mcg to be more optimal for most.

As studies on animals for example show us t3 improves muscle gains to a point then lowers. Simply always ensure enough protein namely to ve safe if on higher dose to only enhance gains. The carnitine however remember I said above id what will blow you out of the water trust me try it asap.

T3 requires about 3 weeks recovery coming off. So usually if doing back to back cycles best to stay on replacement dose.

Which type of carnitine / how much are we talking per day?

 

[MyNameIsJeff]

Again thanks for you random opinion of adding no actual value or points to your arguement. Great bullshit artist for sure who has had elite world class lifters leave me immensely thankful reviews. I suppose my bullshit really gave them great placebo gains.

Win win for me I suppose. Who are you again? Because seems alot of fellas who look the part and lived it are also replying in agreement.

How long till the next of you post the same arguement of your wrong with zero logic proof or well anything. Thanks again.

I'm an actual scientist, and nothing pisses me off more than some dumb bimbo spouting his unqualified opinion and claiming he's doing 'science' by quoting studies he does not understand and which do not actually support his claims.

No one denies that short cycles alternated with cruising dosages can be effective. But there is no evidence (theoretical or empirical) at all that short cycles are superior to longer cycles. You would only arrive at that conclusion if you're an uneducated fuckwit who (unsurprisingly) draws false conclusions from the literature.

 

[Taeian clark]

I'm an actual scientist, and nothing pisses me off more than some dumb bimbo spouting his unqualified opinion and claiming he's doing 'science' by quoting studies he does not understand and which do not actually support his claims.

No one denies that short cycles alternated with cruising dosages can be effective. But there is no evidence (theoretical or empirical) at all that short cycles are superior to longer cycles. You would only arrive at that conclusion if you're an uneducated fuckwit who (unsurprisingly) draws false conclusions from the literature.

Again thanks for another nonsensical reply. Your wrong but I cannot say why or as to what in detail on what your are wrong about. Or post any science to back it. But your wrong.

Thanks again.

 

[Taeian clark]

Which type of carnitine / how much are we talking per day?

Tartate and acetyl 2 to 3 g each.

Another person tricked !

 

[thethinker48]

Thanks for the reply, your reply is obv purely your personal opinion not science backed.

My opinion and experiences have been what I gain is what I keep. I gain 22lbs this cycle, I keep it. So to me it wasn't glycogen or water when I am barely training if at all and I am holding my weight and size minus 1 or 2lbs... But again this is my experience which I am sharing as you are sharing yours.

I like many who have always experienced this just now have the science to back it.

So if you take testosterone and nandrolone and put on 22 lbs, then come off you keep all 22 lbs?

Either you have alien physiology

or what we know about anabolic steroid use causing glycogen supercompensation, intramuscular water retention, and increased blood volume is a big conspiracy theory