Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below Mr. Las Vegas
New member
Good post Tatoo. How did your strength hold up as your bodyweight dropped?
.jpg "Research Chemical Sciences")
.png "Research Chemical Sciences")
Receptor Downgrading.....complete Bullshit
- Thread starter TATOO
- Start date
solidspine
New member
Tattoo, I'm 5'6" 160 lbs, currently taking clen, upping my cardio and cutting to below 9% BF.
With in the next 2-4 weeks I intend to embark upon an extended cycle e.g. "on" indefinitely.
Would appreciate your input,
by the way I have completed only two cycles and I am 50 years old.
I will put my pics up before my cycle and again in 6 months.
With in the next 2-4 weeks I intend to embark upon an extended cycle e.g. "on" indefinitely.
Would appreciate your input,
by the way I have completed only two cycles and I am 50 years old.
I will put my pics up before my cycle and again in 6 months.
The Iron Game
New member
Post my pics, You are joking right? I am currently 160lbs and 6'4. Why would I want to post my pics? Am I a rookie? Well Tatoo, everyone on this board apart from the 7 active members I know are rookies. Most of the vets left this board long ago. All here to learn.
As for your question. Science is not always behind this sport or certain processes and functions. I have not once said Down regulation occurs. What I did say is explain why with upregulation you do not continue to make gains. Anyone who has done 4 or more cycles will know that after 4-6 wks gains rapidly slow down. Why? These are your other variables. Need it spelling out?
As for your question. Science is not always behind this sport or certain processes and functions. I have not once said Down regulation occurs. What I did say is explain why with upregulation you do not continue to make gains. Anyone who has done 4 or more cycles will know that after 4-6 wks gains rapidly slow down. Why? These are your other variables. Need it spelling out?
It's very simple, we all genetically can not grow beyond certain point. When someone does his first cycle, he's on the longest distance from reaching that point, that's why, usually the first cycle produce the best gains. As one growth and get closer to the point his gains are getting smaller and smaller,simply because he's approuching the point were he can't grow any futher. It's in our genes.
Those are the other variables.
Those are the other variables.
Iron Game has a point.
Every f**king time I start a cycle the roids work for about 4 - 6 weeks, then everything comes to a stop.
In the first 4 - 6 weeks every thing goes great. Mass increases fat levels drop a bit, but then everything comes to a stand still.
Doesn't matter a f**k if you increase your food or training you start to loose the benifits that the steroids gave you in the first 4-6 weeks.
So even if receptors up-regulate due to increased androgen levels, something else is missing that brings your gains to a stand still.
What would be a revelation is if someone on this board could tell me what those missing factors are!!!!
Every f**king time I start a cycle the roids work for about 4 - 6 weeks, then everything comes to a stop.
In the first 4 - 6 weeks every thing goes great. Mass increases fat levels drop a bit, but then everything comes to a stand still.
Doesn't matter a f**k if you increase your food or training you start to loose the benifits that the steroids gave you in the first 4-6 weeks.
So even if receptors up-regulate due to increased androgen levels, something else is missing that brings your gains to a stand still.
What would be a revelation is if someone on this board could tell me what those missing factors are!!!!
strengthmonster
New member
Excellent reading.
Panerai
Don't think that the pro's are that much bigger than everyone else because of their genetics.
F**king crap if that where so, then you are trying to tell me that the guy's today have better genetics than the guy's in the 1960's, 70's, and 80's had.
Smell the coffee these guy's are the way they are because of years and years of drug use and abuse.
Aided by sports Doctors who like to remain anon.
Don't think that the pro's are that much bigger than everyone else because of their genetics.
F**king crap if that where so, then you are trying to tell me that the guy's today have better genetics than the guy's in the 1960's, 70's, and 80's had.
Smell the coffee these guy's are the way they are because of years and years of drug use and abuse.
Aided by sports Doctors who like to remain anon.
Twisted_Steel
New member
Real World...Agreement
Without doubt human physiology adapts. It adapts continuously, daily, and to almost any stimuli placed upon it. Why should the application of anabolic androgenic steroid cause any different response?
Irrespective of the form of exogenous stimulus we apply whether it be drugs, training, or lifestyle eventually we all understand that adaptation will take place leading to a secession in response(s).
Scientific findings are gradually improving upon our training techniques, our nutritional requirements, and our pharmacology all in the effort of finding new and unusual methods to ensure some measure of continued growth beyond that which we once thought possible.
Those of you who keep current to the literature within our field (many of you far more so than myself) have seen some impressive yet equally radical departures from prior AAS use and administration. Rarely, will you see the use of traditional static eight to ten week cycles used. Now, we’re seeing the benefit of Macro-Cycles 16-24 weeks in duration. These Macro-Cycles subdivided into periodized 4-6 week sections involve a constant flux of compounds all in the hopes of perpetuating improved response within elite athletes.
Yet dispite all of sciences best efforts adaptation occurs.
Don't you think that "Stagnation vs. Growth", quite possible is the single most vexing question within the field of modern ergogenics!
I certainly do.
Without doubt human physiology adapts. It adapts continuously, daily, and to almost any stimuli placed upon it. Why should the application of anabolic androgenic steroid cause any different response?
Irrespective of the form of exogenous stimulus we apply whether it be drugs, training, or lifestyle eventually we all understand that adaptation will take place leading to a secession in response(s).
Scientific findings are gradually improving upon our training techniques, our nutritional requirements, and our pharmacology all in the effort of finding new and unusual methods to ensure some measure of continued growth beyond that which we once thought possible.
Those of you who keep current to the literature within our field (many of you far more so than myself) have seen some impressive yet equally radical departures from prior AAS use and administration. Rarely, will you see the use of traditional static eight to ten week cycles used. Now, we’re seeing the benefit of Macro-Cycles 16-24 weeks in duration. These Macro-Cycles subdivided into periodized 4-6 week sections involve a constant flux of compounds all in the hopes of perpetuating improved response within elite athletes.
Yet dispite all of sciences best efforts adaptation occurs.
Don't you think that "Stagnation vs. Growth", quite possible is the single most vexing question within the field of modern ergogenics!
I certainly do.
Last edited:
Twisted_Steel
New member
You and I can't speculate what, "Trainer of Freaks" Chris Aceto does for his boys...Colemen, Wheeler, Nassar within the IFBB, but I am damn sure that those men arn't limited to 8-10 week runs of any one particular compound like your average beginner would.
Im willing to bet my bottom dollar that national level npc or pro bodybuilder has a grocery list of drugs as broad and deep as the King James bible.
This has nothing to do with the Captain Insano approach to maximizing first cycles. Were not talking brute force pharmacology, but absolute necessity. These boys, before they ever became recognized pros, were writing and composing there own chemical flow charts.
Undoubtedly, those flow charts are nothing like the ones being composed for them by body morphing perverts like ACETO. Colemen, nassar, wheeler, probably arn't the chemical wizzards you would think them to be. They cycled there drugs just like you, me, E2, and joe did.
The only difference between them and us, is GENETICS!!
Now, factor in SUPERIOR GENETICS, Massive doses, Periodized MASSIVE DOSES, GROWTH HORMONE, AND INSULINE. All this timed, planned, and timed and planned again 280 days out of the year.
NOW, your seeing why a professionals level of achievment compared to our own, doesn't give us a point of reference to argue RECEPTOR up DOWN LEFT OR RIGHT regulation.
Im willing to bet my bottom dollar that national level npc or pro bodybuilder has a grocery list of drugs as broad and deep as the King James bible.
This has nothing to do with the Captain Insano approach to maximizing first cycles. Were not talking brute force pharmacology, but absolute necessity. These boys, before they ever became recognized pros, were writing and composing there own chemical flow charts.
Undoubtedly, those flow charts are nothing like the ones being composed for them by body morphing perverts like ACETO. Colemen, nassar, wheeler, probably arn't the chemical wizzards you would think them to be. They cycled there drugs just like you, me, E2, and joe did.
The only difference between them and us, is GENETICS!!
Now, factor in SUPERIOR GENETICS, Massive doses, Periodized MASSIVE DOSES, GROWTH HORMONE, AND INSULINE. All this timed, planned, and timed and planned again 280 days out of the year.
NOW, your seeing why a professionals level of achievment compared to our own, doesn't give us a point of reference to argue RECEPTOR up DOWN LEFT OR RIGHT regulation.
Similar threads
