Printable View
OK, Since i started to participate in this forum, i learned lots of things that changed my life a lot, and for better.
But there still some things that i need to ask....
I See a lot of you guys doing a 17 or so weeks testosterone cycles...
Does the receptors ever saturate with that cycle lenght????
And why???
Thanks for all your attention
Good question. BUMP
please some input broīs....
bump!!
17 weeks is way too long imho. unless u are pro. all u need is 12 weeks of test. take test + an oral like anadrol or d-bol and trenbolate acetate + 10 iu of insulin after workouts and it will work absolute wonders ! there are certain ways to saturate ur receptors fast ! i remember paul boreson (the guy who died of a drug overdose =( ) stated that he told his trainees to take 2000 grams of test a day, yes 2 g of test/ed for 14 days (im not kidding). he said by doing this with a long acting test like cyp u would not have to wait 4 weeks for gains to kick in !
i dont belive it, but he said it !
Quote:
Originally Posted by gundam675
Gundam675,
What you wrote works for you. As you know steroids do not have the same effect for everyone. Just because that worked for you or people you know, does not mean that it will work for everyone.
I'm not flaming you, Gundam675, I'm reminding any new members reading this thread that the ONLY way a person will know what a steroid is going to do is to use it and observe what it does his/her body.
LOGANXXX,
There is a myth running rampid on several boards. The myth is that receptors get over loaded or saturated. If you do a search you'll find that this has been talked about on this board a lot.
Receptors REGENERATE. People bump their doses way up after ONE or TWO cycles while saying "I need more steroids because my body has become used to it." 10 or 12 weeks of 500mg of this or 600mg of that is not enough time to cause your body not to react to the same doses of steroids just used.
If people would spend more time fixing their diet, then hardly anyone would be complaining about "saturated receptors." It's funny how many people say "I'm eating clean and 4000 calories a day." But when asked "What have you eaten over the last few days? Exactly how much was protein? How much was carbs? What kind of carbs are you eating?..." Lot's of people respond "Uh...I don't count all that shit, I'm just estimating."
Hmmm estimating your calories and protein?? And you're not growing??
Your receptors DO NOT GET SATURATED. THEY REGENERATE. If you you're not growing, it's more likely a result of a poor diet than underdosed steroids, fake steroids or the level of doses being used--especially if you're already running relatively high doses.
Just my $0.02.
on my first cyle at the moment, and i was wondering the same thing about future dosages. i get the feeling that it will take more than a 10-12 week cycle for your body not to react just as well on 500mg of test the next time around.
different strokes for different folks, but i feel people like to up their dosage instead of putting in the work with their training and diet :lift:
peaker
Well me and Bask8 agree and disagree on this one. Your receptors get saturated but they do regenerate so keeping them saturated is a good thing. Also people can't seem to get that most steroids work by several Non AR-mediated paths allowing for benefits outside of the receptor.
I never run test longer than 8 weeks, usualy, after 6 weeks I stop gaining mass and strenght, like i was oversatured.But I found that still taking milder stuff like deca for many weeks after the test bring some more goods results.At my opinion, if your really want to be a long time on AS, you should bridge cycle with hcg/clomid to get full benifit of such a long treatment.
I also agree the fact that using test for a long time will bring you gains but at high cost in money and sides effects.
So, after I did both short and long cycle, this is what I found.....
very good information guys. what i want to know is....what exactly is a receptor. everyone uses this term regularly and accepts it for what it is. but technically and chemically speaking, what exactly is a receptor? id prefer a physical explanation.
A receptor is a cell that accepts a specific substance so that it may be metabolized. An androgen receptor is a cell that accepts androgens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenear
thanks for the answer. so they are all single cell structures?
An androgen receptor is a very large molecule INSIDE a muscle cell that bind to androgens and direct their usage. Androgen receptors are not cells, but a part of the cell's furniture (so to speak).
I'm with Rickson on this one. The receptors saturate, then create more receptors in response to all the saturation. This is called upregulation. In short, the opposite of what most people believe about steroids is true. (And isn't that usually the case anyway?)
The best reason for taking a break from a cycle is your health. Of course, the results stop at some point on a cycle. If they didn't, we would have 10,000lb juicers. However, the only reason a person is able to gain 30lbs in a few weeks is because the receptors upregulate and increase in number during the cycle.
Also, Rickson mentioned non-AR mediated paths to growth. This is very important. Yeah, the androgen receptor is important for growth, but what about all the other things that happen that have absolutely nothing to do with the AR? For example, steroids lower cortisol, which is responsible for breaking down muscle. Dianabol has been shown to be a dopamine agonist, which is conducive to lipolysis. Anadrol is suspected of being active at the estrogen receptor, which would explain the fat and water retention (Remember, it doesn't aromatize). Imagine all the things we don't know...
-SF
incredible information...but the phrase "cells furniture" seems to be plenty of hand waiving. meh, im a physicist so i guess im used to a little hand waiving
This is good info guyz! keep it coming.
Sigmund Froid and Rickson,
Thank you for the correction. I should have mentioned "upregulation" rather than "regeneration" to have been clearer about my statement, "receptors don't get saturated." My main point was to help dispell the myth, which you both have done with your posts.
Rickson,
Can someone cut and paste Froid's response and post it in an educational thread? I'm sure there are MANY people on the board who don't really know what is a receptor, and it's obvious that there are too many people who still believe in the saturation/build-a-tolerance-in-one-cycle myth.
great info forum - keep it coming.
SF, could you elaborate on that...... or let me know where I can read more about non AR effects, related to a specific drug.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sigmund Froid
This is increadibly interesting and useful.
Thanks,
Jay
Thank you very much for all the imput my friends.
Not changing the subject, the test receptors are the same receptors for stanazolol, or other drug? Is there a receptor for each kind of aeīs???
thank you all again
Quote:
Originally Posted by BASK8KACE
Nice bro!!!!! Great info!!
SF is correct by saying receptors are not cells. I should have brushed up on my A&P before responding. Here's the information from the textbook verbatim:Quote:
Originally Posted by LOGANXXX
"Hormones, like neurotransmitters, influence their target cells by chemically binding to integral membrane protein or glycoprotein molecules called receptors. Only the target cells for a certain hormone have receptors that bind and recognize that hormone. For example, thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) binds to receptors on the surface of cells of the thyroid gland, but it does not bind to cells of the ovaries because ovarian cells do not have TSH receptors.
Receptors, like other cellular proteins, are constantly being synthesized and broken down. Generally, a target cell has 2,000-100,000 receptors for a particular hormone. When a hormone (or nuerotransmitter) is present in excess, the number of target cell receptors may decrease. This effect is called down-regulation. For example, when cells of the testes are exposed to a high concentration of luteinizing hormone (LH), the number of LH receptors decreases. Down-regulation thus decreases the responsiveness of target cells to the hormone. On the other hand, when a hormone (or neurotransmitter) is deficient, the number of receptors may increase. This is known as up-regulation and makes a target tissue more sensitive to a hormone or neurotransmitter."
So LoganXXX, to respond to your questions...androgens (including synthetic androgens) will bind to the androgen receptor. Obviously, certain androgens will exert themselves independent of the AR, as has already been discussed. Regarding anti-e's, there aren't Nolvadex or Clomid receptors in our bodies. The way I understand it is that these synthetic estrogens have a propensity to affect certain receptors in various parts of our bodies, e.g., hypothalamus, breast tissue, etc.
Regarding up- and down-regulation, it's pretty clear from the text that both principles are medically established fact. It's my opinion that although up-regulation initially occurs in the presence of supraphysiological androgen levels, over time, down-regulation of those receptors will eventually occur. This may take 6 weeks, 6 months, or 6 years...who knows? But it makes sense to me, if nothing else, simply as a protective measure.
Here's another very interesting section of text that I came across:
"The responsiveness of a target cell to a hormone depends on (1) the hormone's concentration, (2) the abundance of its receptors, and (3) influences exerted by other hormones. When the level of a hormone rises or more of its receptors are present (up-regulation), a target cell responds more vigorously. Also, the actions of some hormones on target cells require a recent or simultaneous exposure to a second hormone. In such cases, the second hormone is said to have a permissive effect. For example, epinephrine alone stimulates lipolysis (the breakdown of trigylcerides) only weakly. When small amounts of thyroid hormones (T3 & T4) are present, however, the same amount of epinephrine stimulates lipolysis much more powerfully. Both thyroid hormones and glucocorticoids (mainly cortisol) have permissive effects on several other hormones. Sometimes the permissive hormone up-regulates receptors for the other hormone and sometimes it promotes synthesis of a critical enzyme needed for expression of the other hormone's effects."
I have experienced this permissive effect personally. After only 2 weeks of taking 2.4IU's of GH daily (5-on, 2-off), I experienced severe hyperthyroidism. My thyroid activity skyrocketed in response to the increased levels of GH. This caused an up-regulation of beta receptors which happily grabbed every bit of epinephrine and nor-epinephrine they could. The result was essentially a 5-day asthma attack due to vasoconstriction which increased my blood pressure from ~120/60 to 178/105. My resting HR also increased from ~60 BPM to ~110 BPM.
Thankfully, I had this A&P textbook at the time which enabled me to begin with the GH and identify what had happened in succession. I went to my doc, explained what I believed to be the case. He concurred, told me to lay off the GH, wrote out a script for an albuterol inhaler, and sent me on my way. After 12 hours on the inhaler, my BP returned to baseline and the tachycardia disappeared. Interestingly, even days after discontinuing the GH, I continued to experience thyroid storms which mandated periodic use of the inhaler. It's as if my body was expecting to "see" increased levels of GH and anticipated by increasing my thyroid activity. I believe that hormonal interactions, as described in the text, serve to maintain a level of parity among certain hormones.
Goldenear, what a info you got here man...awesome. So, in a certain way, hgh stimulate the absorption of aeīs.....it will up-regulate ar receptors because our body will increase cell metabolism.....Thatīs not a stupid conclusion, is it??????
good posts everyone.. intressting reads
LOGANXXX, you've kinda lost me...Tudo bain? Perhaps if my Portuguese was better, I wouldn't have this problem.
I think you've got it the other way around. I believe the general consensus is that supraphysiological levels of testosterone tend to cause the hypothalamus to step up production of GHRH & TRH, causing the pituitary to release a bit more GH & TSH, yielding increased levels of somatomedin-C, T3, and T4 ---> thus increasing basal metobolic rate.
That was a nice try in portuguese!!! you almost got it....(it would be Tudo Bem)i wish you could wright in portuguese.....it would be a lot easier to understand a few terms...;-)
But anyway, i read your post 15 times already, but now with your last post i think i got it......
Man you got deep on the subject, i almost lost myself..lol
Thank you for your pacient......
Great info - bump for those who didn't read it
Bump an old thread.
I'm doing alittle research and
came across this thread which
some may find a good read,I did.
i have known for awhil that AAS increase AR.
this made me wonder though, does that mean AAS should work better as time goes on.....no? given enough time between cycles?
I believe I once read an article stating that what really happens when the effect of gear decreases in a cycle is not the "saturation" or "down regulation" of receptors, but instead an increase in catabolic activity in the tissue. Remember that the body has several ways of falling back to homeostatic equilibrium - both regulation of the anabolic as well as the catabolic activity matters a lot.
SHBG and Estrogen seem culprits...Quote:
Originally Posted by AnabolicBoy1981
And possibly other mechanisms at work.
great stuff,tanx