Going back to regular doses after taking a long break?

[nothuman]

Let's say you come off AAS for a long time,
- maintain most, if not all your size
- then you want to go back on

do you start back at your usual doses from before? Or do you start lower and still expect to grow? I would imagine you have to go back to the usual doses since you haven't lost any size, if you expect to grow.

What does everyone think? Personal experience welcome

 

[Bobby Light]

I'd start lower than usually and then ramp up over the course of the cycle to using doses higher than you've used before...that's my opinion anyway and that's how I'd do it...although I have not come off at all since going on let alone come off for long periods of time.

 

[chinaboy]

I would still start low and work up. Why not? Your sensitivity to AAS may have gone down and less AAS may create greater gains than before.

 

[buck]

if you held onto all you had gained then you are only as big as your T levels can maintain. so you should not need large doses for growth till you are beyond your genetic limits.

 

[RINO]

If you maintained well because it was a short time off, I'd go back to the same doses. If you lost size , start low and build again.

 

[tr]

well...

if you have maintained all your gains you have not been off long enough to respond to lower dosages you were on before...the more time you are off, the more size you lose the better you will respond to lower dosages, if you can maintain most of your muscle you have gained on bigger dosages your system is not restarted it is very far from being whats called "normal" hormonal system and its not ready to respond good to lower dosages

 

[nothuman]

if you have maintained all your gains you have not been off long enough to respond to lower dosages you were on before...the more time you are off, the more size you lose the better you will respond to lower dosages, if you can maintain most of your muscle you have gained on bigger dosages your system is not restarted it is very far from being whats called "normal" hormonal system and its not ready to respond good to lower dosages

This is what I thought

 

[luv2kurl]

This is what I thought

Exactly

 

[luv2kurl]

if you have maintained all your gains you have not been off long enough to respond to lower dosages you were on before...the more time you are off, the more size you lose the better you will respond to lower dosages, if you can maintain most of your muscle you have gained on bigger dosages your system is not restarted it is very far from being whats called "normal" hormonal system and its not ready to respond good to lower dosages

Appologize....This id what I was wanting to quote

 

[Pharm_Fed]

if you have maintained all your gains you have not been off long enough to respond to lower dosages you were on before...the more time you are off, the more size you lose the better you will respond to lower dosages, if you can maintain most of your muscle you have gained on bigger dosages your system is not restarted it is very far from being whats called "normal" hormonal system and its not ready to respond good to lower dosages

What about the guys (like Dante) who claim you can change your body's set point by maintaining a certain weight for a long time? If that's the case you could have restored a "normal" hormone system but still hold more muscle than you previously would have.

Another consideration is all the guys who start working with Phil, John or Shelby and say they are growing better on lower doses. This is often without even being off for a long period of time.

 

[cnriagu]

What about the guys (like Dante) who claim you can change your body's set point by maintaining a certain weight for a long time? If that's the case you could have restored a "normal" hormone system but still hold more muscle than you previously would have.

Another consideration is all the guys who start working with Phil, John or Shelby and say they are growing better on lower doses. This is often without even being off for a long period of time.

Another thought...
The OP said held most of the size, not the muscle. I've been off for long periods and kept an appreciable amount of size due to the fact I would only use heavier doses during contest prep.
Going from and environment of restricted calories with more gear, to increasing caloric intact with no gear (training still intense) may result in maintenance of size. Although the muscle density isn't the same...

 

[tr]

What about the guys (like Dante) who claim you can change your body's set point by maintaining a certain weight for a long time? If that's the case you could have restored a "normal" hormone system but still hold more muscle than you previously would have.

Another consideration is all the guys who start working with Phil, John or Shelby and say they are growing better on lower doses. This is often without even being off for a long period of time.

Pics would be better proof...I cannot imagine how someone could grow better on lower dosages than were growing on higher dosages, this is against logic...diet is important,but you can eat all the food in the world it wont be utilized in very low hormonal environment...so they must be doing smth crazy far from what is called bodybuilding nutrition or training before they met John, Shelby or whatever

As for Dante thoughts...He once mentioned Justin Harris as an example (aka troponin)...he competed at 250-260 I think on lots of bodybuilding supps, now he is about the same weight with nothing...the same weight but not the same body! Justin trained hard, ate a lot is taller guy and I think without a doubt he could be about the same where he is now with just food and training, drugs, dosages havent set any points in his body, lets be fair he isnt better than his natural hormonal system lets him be
Dante and his guys stays bigger but if I am not mistaken most of them stays on 200-300mg test,some hgh thats is far from natural or true trt, that is a big difference in maintaining what they have gained vs trying to maintai while going completely off or with true trt

Phil once said you are as big as your dosage is...so if you start/continue smaller you can grow of lower dosages if you want to get bigger than your biggest version you need to increase dosages no matter how much time you were off

 

[Swifto]

I've done this and you respond much better with a long break. Start low and work up again.

 

[nothuman]

Another consideration is all the guys who start working with Phil, John or Shelby and say they are growing better on lower doses. This is often without even being off for a long period of time.

The only way that's possible is if they were drastically under eating before.

Another thought...
The OP said held most of the size, not the muscle. I've been off for long periods and kept an appreciable amount of size due to the fact I would only use heavier doses during contest prep.
Going from and environment of restricted calories with more gear, to increasing caloric intact with no gear (training still intense) may result in maintenance of size. Although the muscle density isn't the same...

Well if you're going to make me use myself as an example...I kept the muscle too. My strength is the same. Except that I used 5iu hgh alongside TRT (which could be why I kept all my muscle). I stopped hgh a week ago and have lost about 5lbs of water.

 

[dalvare1]

The only way that's possible is if they were drastically under eating before.

no it could be a training or recovery issue

 

[nothuman]

no it could be a training or recovery issue

The point is, the person was doing something seriously wrong if they manage to grow on lower doses than before.

 

[QuietStorm]

Let's say you come off AAS for a long time,
- maintain most, if not all your size
- then you want to go back on

do you start back at your usual doses from before? Or do you start lower and still expect to grow? I would imagine you have to go back to the usual doses since you haven't lost any size, if you expect to grow.

What does everyone think? Personal experience welcome

first i would ask how long is a long time? a year, two, more? if more than a year or two, I would start low and work up. if a year or less..probably not.

 

[nothuman]

first i would ask how long is a long time? a year, two, more? if more than a year or two, I would start low and work up. if a year or less..probably not.

4 1/2 months off short esters (so technically longer than if I used long esters)

 

[Swifto]

I took about 3 years away from steroids, did a 3 month Accutane course and then my acne was 10x better than before (and added an AI).

 

[QuietStorm]

4 1/2 months off short esters (so technically longer than if I used long esters)

Personally, I wouldnt consider that a long time. But, start low and see how you react. You can always increase if you feel you need to.