how many mgs of testosterone can the receptors take?

[Alex Rodriguez]

i know test e and test c r pretty much the closest thing to natural test, so anyways, how many mgs of test can they really take in a rough general b4 injecting more steroids pretty meaningless.

[stallion_1]

[Phate]

i know test e and test c r pretty much the closest thing to natural test, so anyways, how many mgs of test can they really take in a rough general b4 injecting more steroids pretty meaningless.

actually, test suspension is the closest to rest, test cyp and enanthate have a very long ester attached which is why they can be injected so far apart, but test susp has no ester, it is pure test in a water suspension and that's why it has to injected 2x a day

[daem]

i know test e and test c r pretty much the closest thing to natural test, so anyways, how many mgs of test can they really take in a rough general b4 injecting more steroids pretty meaningless.

From experiments, I've went up to 1500mg / EW and didn't notice a difference from 1000mg.

I think the key is diet...If you could somehow eat train sleep around the clock and get 10K clean cals a day, I think you could go up to 2g's and reap the benefits.

The problem is sustainability and side effects...Personally I don't think anything over 1g is worth it, but you shouldn't reach 1g / wk for at least 3 or 4 cycles.

[InsaneInTheMembrane]

Honestly, I'm using half the test now (350mg/wk) than I did last cycle (700) and I'm noticing much better results with lesser sides

I agree with daem, diet is key; most people go overboard to compensate for a lack of a disciplined diet

[Freakish]

yeah i agree with daem and insane,it mostly depends on your diet and training however it is also down to genetics so each person will differ,you have to find what'l work best for you with the least sides

[NATE0406]

imo anything past 750mgs/week is not worth the money or the sides.

[eckstg]

wow 10k calories a day?and i thought 5k would be hard to acomplish on a clean diet.Any of you eat close to 10cal a day?if so what you weigh and how much you plan to see the scale move a wk?

[eckstg]

funny seems i rwad before jay cutlers huge ass eats only about 6k cal day but michael phelps cant get up to 200lbs eating 8 to 10k cal a day.Genetics can be crazy i guess!

[stallion_1]

wow 10k calories a day?and i thought 5k would be hard to acomplish on a clean diet.Any of you eat close to 10cal a day?if so what you weigh and how much you plan to see the scale move a wk?

i very much doubt somebody hits 10k cals, unless ur like a sumo fighter which they do

[skinnykenney]

wow 10k calories a day?and i thought 5k would be hard to acomplish on a clean diet.Any of you eat close to 10cal a day?if so what you weigh and how much you plan to see the scale move a wk?

there is no physiolgical way the human body can motabolize more than about 3500-3700 cals! (ON AVERAGE)
weather you workout more or not.

money can be wasted on over eating not just gear.

the reason a person eating tons of cals does not get fat is part working it off in the gym and part of how quick the human body motabolizes cals.

[skinnykenney]

i very much doubt somebody hits 10k cals, unless ur like a sumo fighter which they do

notice that some get fat at a faster rate than others?
this is because of cal absorbtion being a little diferent in everyone

[jstraw428]

Michael phelps swims for like 5-6 hours a day.....His off season diet consists of about 12000 cal a day.....but he also doesnt eat clean....his diet is full of pasta, pizza, pancakes with syrup......He burns so many calories a day training, it doesnt matter what he eats, he is just looking for calories...

[RapaciousShark]

i heard he eats 10k. I'd believe it, but how the hell is he not bloated and taking shi*ts all the time? If I ate that much a day i wouldnt dare take my shirt off i'd look pregnant. god his craps must be enormous....

anyway, I get the feeling that techinically the more test you inject, the more the receptors get, but after a certain number it gets pointless, like a graph such as y= 1/x approaching its limits.

[Bigmax]

i very much doubt somebody hits 10k cals, unless ur like a sumo fighter which they do

Not true bro...there are plenty athletes that hit that or very colse and dont resemble anything close to a sumo...

[RapaciousShark]

i guess x^1/2 is a better example

[jstraw428]

Just think about how many calories Michael Phelps burn in a day, swimming 5-6 hours a day.....That is a ton of cardio.....he would have to eat that much, just to maintain his current body weight...

[Bio-boosted]

These are different sports, i'd bet a few 1000 of those cals are in glucose and lite (?) fats to give the sprint ability, and carb high for the necessary endurance. Plenty of gatorades will add to them cals lol. Not what a bodybuilder wants, i imagine

[jstraw428]

He eats like 2-3 lbs of pasta every day, along with 2 large pizzas, pancakes and syrup....definitly not what a bb would want....

[RuhlFreak55]

there is no physiolgical way the human body can motabolize more than about 3500-3700 cals! (ON AVERAGE)
weather you workout more or not.

money can be wasted on over eating not just gear.

the reason a person eating tons of cals does not get fat is part working it off in the gym and part of how quick the human body motabolizes cals.

[LATS60]

there is no physiolgical way the human body can motabolize more than about 3500-3700 cals! (ON AVERAGE)
weather you workout more or not.

money can be wasted on over eating not just gear.

the reason a person eating tons of cals does not get fat is part working it off in the gym and part of how quick the human body motabolizes cals.

Jeez SK, you do talk a load of **** sometimes, do you know for instance how many cals an hour the human body uses while asleep, just for starters, thats before we even think about getting mobile.

[jstraw428]

not to mention the calories burnt from getting morning wood....

[double chicken]

not to mention the calories burnt from getting morning wood....

or afternoon wood for that matter.

[Alex Rodriguez]

bump, i think this thread needs more answers.

[jstraw428]

^^^^^Why?

[Drake Hotel]

To answer the question you'd need to know how many androgen receptors you have. I guess you don't know that, so what's the point of this question?

[jstraw428]

the answer is 3

[RapaciousShark]

bump, i think this thread needs more answers.

This is what i was talking about in my previous post. The function is similar to f(x)= ln[(1/2)x]. The y value represents units of receptors available for bondage in a given mass of muscle tissue. This, of course, is entirely arbitrary. The x represents the weekly dosage of, say, test E

As you can see, the integral from x=0 to point A shows a rapid increase in the receptors activated. Initially, the more test e, the better.

Between A and B, you see diminishing returns with the continued increase in the dosage, but it's obviously still worth injecting.

Between B and C you start to question whether the dosage increase is worth the money.

From C to D you see that there is technically an increase in receptor activation, but every increment costs so much more test e that it is utterly pointless.

Now, I stretched out the x axis values to exaggerate the distances in the latter integrals to emphasize diminutive gains from increased test injects at that point.

Like i said, this is entirely arbitrary, would obviously vary from individual to individual, and doesn't take into account baseline test levels.

To get a vaguely accurate graph you'd actually have to have the data to construct a probability curve, which, at this point, i don't think exists.

Anyway, thats the best answer you're gonna get.

[BG]

Receptors regenerate constantly or guys like Ronnie and Jay would always have to increase their gear to hold their size. Now the problem with high test dosages is the amount of estrogen your body would create in order for it to bind to the AR. You would have to run short high dosage cycle to avoid sides like Marcus talks about. Theres many other chemicals your body produces over time with those dosages that would hinder gains and not make it worth while, like cortisol.

[LATS60]

I read a scientific article on this some time ago, it stated simply, that to double your gains on a test only cycle would need an increase in test of quadruple the amount you were initially using, ad infinitum.

[SmittyTheOX]

This is what i was talking about in my previous post. The function is similar to f(x)= ln[(1/2)x]. The y value represents units of receptors available for bondage in a given mass of muscle tissue. This, of course, is entirely arbitrary. The x represents the weekly dosage of, say, test E

As you can see, the integral from x=0 to point A shows a rapid increase in the receptors activated. Initially, the more test e, the better.

Between A and B, you see diminishing returns with the continued increase in the dosage, but it's obviously still worth injecting.

Between B and C you start to question whether the dosage increase is worth the money.

From C to D you see that there is technically an increase in receptor activation, but every increment costs so much more test e that it is utterly pointless.

Now, I stretched out the x axis values to exaggerate the distances in the latter integrals to emphasize diminutive gains from increased test injects at that point.

Like i said, this is entirely arbitrary, would obviously vary from individual to individual, and doesn't take into account baseline test levels.

To get a vaguely accurate graph you'd actually have to have the data to construct a probability curve, which, at this point, i don't think exists.

Anyway, thats the best answer you're gonna get.

This is the BEST post I think I have ever read on this forum Shark, good shit.

I love the math and science behind things, it makes my inner nerd dance

[MuscleScience]

So much misinformation I do not even know were to start.

First it is metabolism and metabolize.....lol

Secondly the human body can digest 10,000 Kcals a day. It can go even higher. The human body wants and needs energy. It does not care how much it gets at at time. It will try to absorb as much as it possible can at any one time. Which if you use assimilation to new mass as a measure of absorption, equals between 20-25% of total caloric intake. The rest is lost as metabolic waste and heat. The human body has to obey the laws of thermodynamics just the same as a car engine does.

[RapaciousShark]

thanks smit.

BGs post reminds me to mention that the whole system of muscle growth and the influence of roids is so much more complex than my 2-D graph, or even the question at hand. The mere point was to show my idea of the pattern. I think this is in fact a perfect demonstration of the law of diminishing returns.

[MuscleScience]

thanks smit.

BGs post reminds me to mention that the whole system of muscle growth and the influence of roids is so much more complex than my 2-D graph, or even the question at hand. The mere point was to show my idea of the pattern. I think this is in fact a perfect demonstration of the law of diminishing returns.

Agreed, there is a paper on here that someone posted that showed the gains in increasing dosages for TRT therapy in older men. There was a dose response curve but they only went up to 600 mg/week in the study. The poster graphed out the continued dose response curve if it was continued on theoritical dosages.

[SmittyTheOX]

Agreed, there is a paper on here that someone posted that showed the gains in increasing dosages for TRT therapy in older men. There was a dose response curve but they only went up to 600 mg/week in the study. The poster graphed out the continued dose response curve if it was continued on theoritical dosages.

If someone has a link to that article post it up, Im over trawling through this forum today

[MuscleScience]

If someone has a link to that article post it up, Im over trawling through this forum today

I couldnt tell you were its at. I looked at in vain about 6 months ago.

[transformer]

The graph is under Testosterone Enanthate on the steroid .com webpage. It shows a 15 percent increase in lean mass. The study maxed out with a 6 month 600 mg Test E cycle.

[Swifto]

The most I've been too is 500mg/wk so I cannot comment from experience.

But from seeing others post's and reading various forums, it seems the point of diminishing returns is around the 1000-1500mg/wk mark.

As BG said, its not about only that, Estrogen, SHBG, cortisol and perhaps mechanics we still do not understand all play roles here.

[RapaciousShark]

The most I've been too is 500mg/wk so I cannot comment from experience.

But from seeing others post's and reading various forums, it seems the point of diminishing returns is around the 1000-1500mg/wk mark.

As BG said, its not about only that, Estrogen, SHBG, cortisol and perhaps mechanics we still do not understand all play roles here.

No way do returns only begin to diminish that far out. I'm willing to believe there is still more to gain at dosages that high, maybe much more, but I'd have to say every mg past 6-800 is going to bring you less than the mg before.


jmo of course

[LATS60]

Well it's been interesting read.
Quite simply the more test you take the bigger you will get, there does however come a point where the gains start to be outweighed by the sides.
As i said in my earlier post if you want to gain double that you did on 500mg for instance, you would have to take 2g, and so on.