steroid effectivness

**Samson1** · 12-05-2005, 04:06 PM

Hi i just have a quick quwestion do u think that your body gets used to steroids ,By this i mean that when you take say 500mg of test per week that in time(after a few cycles of this dosage) you have to move up to 750mg per week to see results

I have been of gear 4 a while now and if i was to cycle again would i have to increse the dosages from my previous cycle to see adiquit results????????

**Pinnacle** · 12-05-2005, 04:14 PM

Yes indeed your body builds up a tolerance to anabolics.I'll quote RedBaron,since we had this discussion last evening and he worded this rather well.

"Maybe a poor choice of word on my part, but here is what I am saying ... in the medical profession, we have many drugs at our disposal. If I prescribe medication "X" to you, I know in doing so in about 5-7 years, your body is going to catch on and quit responding to it. Does that mean that the receptors that that substance use cease to exist ... no. But what the body does with anything we put into it out of the "norm" is over time it will build a resistance.

With respect to peptides and AAS's, typically we cycle them such that we don't push the body to the point of this type of resistance and protection. In the case of the pros though, they basically have to be on just about year around, and to feed and keep 300 pounds of beef, you have to use no only enormous weights, but enormous levels of hormones and protein to keep that much muscle alive and kicking. Doing this for as long and and high of a dose as is required of them most certainly has the body doing what it can to keep at its "norm".

We can call this whatever we like ... The receptors still exist certainly and are constantly renewed ... but substance "X" is not going to have the same effect with massive use over long periods of time, and that holds true for whatever you wish to talk about ... anabolics, peptides, pain medications, sleeping pills, anti-inflamatories, reflux meds, diabetes meds, anti-biotics, etc., etc."

**Pinnacle** · 12-05-2005, 04:18 PM

And a quote from Nandi....

Quote:
Originally posted by Nandi
You can read some of my speculations, based on published research, why gains seem to slow after a while here, in the article archives. There are many other posssible explanations as well, including Big Cat's. Another reason why bodybuilders just don't get infinitely large after years of AAS use is that there may be a limit to the ability of satellite cells to keep proliferating and contributing to muscle hypertrophy. The number of divisions a cell can undergo is finite (except for immortalized, cancerous cells) due to the fact that normal cells lack telomerase. Telomeres are sections of DNA that shorten each time a cell divides. Eventually the telomeres are "used up" and the cell can no longer divide. Telomerase replaces the telomeres allowing for continued cell division. Since anabolic steroids promote satellite cell proliferation, they may lead to the premature exhaustion of the ability of satellite cells to proliferate and contribute to hypertrophy. This is speculation; the real answer to your question is yet to be determined.
http://www.cuttingedgemuscle.com/For...ticle.php?id=8
Q: Often times you hear people talking about taking a break from taking steroids so their receptors can clean out otherwise their gains will come to a halt. Is there any truth to this?
A: Receptors are continually being degraded and remanufactured in cells, so they never really clog up and require cleaning. I think this is a sort of fanciful way of talking about receptor upregulation/downregulation, which is a complex topic. “Do gains slow because receptors downregulate (decrease in number and/or sensitivity) during a cycle?” is probably a more accurate way of posing the question. There are conflicting data in this regard. Short-term in vitro and in vivo studies generally show that androgens upregulate the androgen receptor (AR) in skeletal muscle. For example, in humans given 15 mg of oxandrolone daily for 5 days, the skeletal muscle AR density nearly doubled (13). When exposed to testosterone in vitro, skeletal muscle AR expression increased significantly (14).
In longer-term studies the picture is somewhat different. One study looked at AR expression in androgen treated sedentary rats vs nontreated exercised rats over 8 weeks. The androgen treated rats showed a decrease in the number of receptors, whereas the exercise trained rats showed an increase. (15) Unfortunately, the authors failed to address the question of interest to bodybuilders, and that would be the combined effects of exercise and androgen use on skeletal muscle AR regulation.
In long term studies in humans we get yet a different picture. In work conducted by Sheffield-Moore et. al., (16) older men were supplemented with testosterone so as to bring their testosterone levels into the mid to high physiological range. Androgen receptor expression had more than doubled after one month of treatment, yet by 6 months had returned to baseline. If this downregulation occurs when supraphysiological doses of testosterone are used, it could very well explain why gains tend to slow during a long cycle.
So, unfortunately the data are equivocal. The definitive experiment of combining supraphysiological AAS with resistance training and looking at AR regulation does not appear to have been carried out yet. Would exercise combined with AAS maintain increased AR expression, or would the addition of exercise serve to offset the AAS induced AR downregulation observed in the study by Bricout et al? Do the extremely high doses of AAS used by bodybuilders lead to more or less downregulation ( or even upregulation ) compared to what was seen by Sheffield-Moore et al? These are just a couple of questions that require further research, and could lead to answers on why exercise combined with AAS use is so much more productive than simply using steroids alone when it comes to building muscle mass.

**Conkies** · 12-05-2005, 04:35 PM

Great Post Mr.Pinnacle

**stupidhippo** · 12-05-2005, 04:42 PM

agreed... the nandis one really makes sense to me.. First time Ive read a beliavable theory on why do the gains halt.. who knows maybe the receptor regulation is one of the main culprits..