Does more mg/day = more gains per workout (assuming all else equal)?

**quine** · 12-28-2012, 11:44 PM

That is, if you have:

A: Lifts heavy and to failure, 5000 calories/day, 200g protein/day, 500mg Test E/week

B: Lifts heavy and to failure, 5000 calories/day, 200g/protein/day, 1000mg Test E/week

Will the added Test E equate to more gains? Is this a linear thing?

**stpete** · 12-28-2012, 11:47 PM

No. And there's a lot more to it than that.

**quine** · 12-28-2012, 11:59 PM

Like what?

**stpete** · 12-29-2012, 12:08 AM

The person using 1,000mgs will need more than the person using half that amount. Or should i say it the other way around?

I'll put it to you like this: you can take 1,000mgs + EW. I'll take 500mgs EW. I'll still be stronger than you.

Why?

**quine** · 12-29-2012, 12:14 AM

I have no idea why someone who takes 1000mgs/week would need more than someone using 500mg/week. We're assuming all other things equal right? That is, "you" is not actually you but the hypothetical you from the example?

**stpete** · 12-29-2012, 12:57 AM

"All other things equal is not always equal." If you're the same body type as myself w/years of experience and still experiencing difficulty gaining weight/muscle and i do not have the same issues, what would be the problem?" Well, i could attribute some of that to diet, right? Maybe some to training regimen? Maybe both?

An experienced lifter and dieter will soon find out what the issue is. Regardless of AAS usage. The inexperienced will wonder around looking for an answer when it's right in front of their face.

Hence, an experienced lifter will need next to nothing to be stronger than an inexperienced juiced up newb. just my thoughts...

**quine** · 12-29-2012, 01:20 AM

What I'm basically asking is if more Test = more muscle gains, or what is the point where it stops mattering, basically.

I've been working out seriously for about a year. I haven't cycled anything yet and won't until I'm down to at least 10%BF.

**Turkish Juicer** · 12-29-2012, 01:36 AM

OP, all else are never equal between two lifters. You can't simply reduce this to daily calories and macros being the same, that's not how it goes at all.

Genetics will largely determine the outcome, followed by diet and training routine which includes its own determinants such as strength, intensity, volume, pace of recovery in between sessions and etc.

Then, there are the notions of pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics. In simple terms, what if my body responds much better to 500mg of Test than your body does to 1000mg?

I am firm believer that Lee Haney was on by far less juice than Richard Gaspari throughout the years where Rich was ultimately determined to beat him on the Mr. O stage, which never happened. Rich was known to be super-strong, he was one of the most dedicated competitive pro BB in the history of IFBB, he was extremely well self-taught and educated in terms of diet, training and administration of synthetic hormones, there is even the claim that he was one of the first pro BB to have access to pharm grade HGH, he was one of the most ripped and vascular BB ever, but in the end, genetics won: Haney beat his ass like a monkey on that Mr. O stage EVERY TIME.

Another vital example would be Franco vs. Arnold: they practically lived, ate and trained together. Franco was the strongest BB ever, his compound lifts were significantly higher than Arnold's, and who won every time on the stage? Not Franco. Genetics dominated the scene, without a second thought.

So, it is never the case that all else are equal.

**quine** · 12-29-2012, 01:53 AM

This thing of "two lifters will have different genes" doesn't really answer my question and I got the point the first time. I am acutely aware that genetic differences exist. Assume they're twins or even the same person, it doesn't matter for the purposes of what I want to know. I'm asking if person A takes 500mg of test E and person A takes 1000mg of test E, and has the same workout both times, does that equate to more muscle gains?

The part about "my body will respond differently to 500mg of test E than your 1000mg" confuses me though, in that I'm not sure how to interpret this. Are you saying that your body may take in Test E better such that you only need 500mg of Test E to equal 1000mg of someone else's? Because that gets at my question, since I'm wondering if more Test E = more gains.

**livingthedream** · 12-29-2012, 01:55 AM

I don't think he is comparing lifter A to lifter B. he is asking if the same person would experience better results with more juice. From what I have read higher and higher doses arent needed until you grow further past your genetic limits.

**Turkish Juicer** · 12-29-2012, 02:19 AM

Gotcha!

OP: Every dependable human study I have come across with over the years pointed out to higher testosterone doses having significantly greater effect on developing & maintaining muscle mass.

Thus, more Test E should mean more strength & muscle gains, except for cases where higher levels of exogenous Testosterone leads user to experience serious health problems and therefore will do harm to an extent where the lifter can't lift to neither make more muscle mass nor be able to maintain the current mass.