Steroids for life??

[PatBateman3]

Ok, here is one concept I've never scientifically been able to get my hands around. Everyone has a genetic limit. Suffice it to say, genetically, that most men 5'5 weren't meant to weigh 250lbs.

So I understand that gear can help you reach your natural limit in an accelerated manner. However, once you go over that limit, don't you have to basically cycle for life, lest the muscle turn to fat since your body was not meant to support a certain LBM over point X?? I cycled in college and then tried to go clean and no matter what I did, the muscle slowly went away and turned to hard (not soft, if that makes any sense) fat and tissue.

 

[x_con]

I have often wondered the same. Once you are past your limit i dont think any amount of eating and working out will keep you there for long. I know for me that I always seem to return to the same weight and strenght eventually unless I have some "help". But if you do 2 -4 cycles a year I think most can stay one step ahead of their genitics, however, never coming off would obviously be the best way to stay above ones genetic potenical. Great quote in your location by the way, what is that from?

 

[PatBateman3]

I have often wondered the same. Once you are past your limit i dont think any amount of eating and working out will keep you there for long. I know for me that I always seem to return to the same weight and strenght eventually unless I have some "help". But if you do 2 -4 cycles a year I think most can stay one step ahead of their genitics, however, never coming off would obviously be the best way to stay above ones genetic potenical. Great quote in your location by the way, what is that from?

Thanks man! Same movie from where my handle comes from, American Psycho. The book by Brett Easton Ellis is top-notch as well.

I like your info/point, but my one question/concern, at least for myself, is (1) do I really want to go through the maintenance, effort and routine of 2-4 cycles per year, especially since I am not a competitor and do it for the vanity alone, and (2) how healthy would 2-4 cycles per yer be in the long-term anyway?

 

[LVTitan]

i always get back down to 135-140 when i come off, never could stay above 140 natty..

 

[PatBateman3]

i always get back down to 135-140 when i come off, never could stay above 140 natty..

Ok, but how many cycles a year do you have to complete to stay where you want to be above 140? I guess truly it would depend on what your goal weight was, so that's kind of a stupid question, but just curious.

 

[x_con]

Thanks man! Same movie from where my handle comes from, American Psycho. The book by Brett Easton Ellis is top-notch as well.

I like your info/point, but my one question/concern, at least for myself, is (1) do I really want to go through the maintenance, effort and routine of 2-4 cycles per year, especially since I am not a competitor and do it for the vanity alone, and (2) how healthy would 2-4 cycles per yer be in the long-term anyway?

I know for myself I live this way first as a hobby and second out of vanity. For me thats enough. In the past I've had much more destructive hobbies so I figure at least now Im concerned with diet, exercise, and sleeping right. If I have to use gear to keep things changing enough to hold my interest then so be it. As far as health concerns go, I can only say so far so good for me. I guess its a personal choice we all have to make. By the way, I downloaded American Psycho a while back but never watched it, I have downloaded more movies than I could ever watch. But I'll deff check it out now. Weigh all your circumstances in life and Im sure you'll figure out what your willing to do.

 

[Triple J]

u r both right once over your limit you need to stay on, to maintain that size long-term. however there is some theories that claim your limit can be extended to some degree, with enough GH, roids, etc. which would allow you to be bigger once cleaned out than you would have ever been without the experiment

 

[fugetaboutit]

i always get back down to 135-140 when i come off, never could stay above 140 natty..

you're joking right? Are you really short?

 

[djsf]

My understanding is muscle doesn't "turn" to fat. They are chemically very different and my understanding is one does not convert to the other. You can have fat and muscle in independently varying amounts. Probably you lost muscle and gained fat, but you could lose the fat, leaving you with the original muscle, albeit smaller.

Various snippets from the internet:

"Myth: If you stop working out, muscle will turn into fat. Many people believe that if they stop working out, their muscle will turn into fat. Muscle and fat are two distinct tissues, however, and never can be converted from one to the other. If you stop exercising, muscle tissue will shrink, so you may feel flabbier. Also, when muscles get smaller, they do not need as many calories, so your metabolism slows. With a slower metabolism, if you eat the same amount of calories, you may gain body fat."

"Myth No. 2: muscle turns to fat when you don't exercise
For those who spend three or four days a week sweating through cardio and strength training, what happens to the muscle when you stop working out? Does it turn to fat?
Fitness guru Donna Richardson Joyner explained that this can't happen. "Muscle is muscle, fat is fat and you can't turn one into the other," she said.
It's a source of confusion for many, but there's no comparison deep inside the body. Dr Walter Thompson, a professor of exercise science at Georgia State University, said muscle is much denser then fat and is more compact.
He said that when you stop working out the muscle becomes a bit flabby and "non-functional", but does not turn into fat.
And if you're hoping for the opposite, sorry but exercise does not transform fat into muscle.
"You have to get rid of fat by doing cardio", said Lara Szymanski at The Sports Club in LA, "You have to build lean muscle and that's what you do by strength training."

Anyone have anything to say to the contrary?

 

[pushnpedl]

once you have exceeded your natural limit with gear, its just a struggle to see how long yo can keep the meat after cycles. The better pct and eating after cycle thelonger it stays. But you will lose some meat even after the water weight.

ps. calling it meat, i must be hungry

 

[N V ME]

I started out a natural consistent weight of around 215lb after cycling for aprox. 2.5 years off and on I am sitting around 225-230 been off for well over 7 months. I maxed out at 255lbs, then settled at 235-240lb on average. I never tried to gain mass just bring up certain points of my physique. I guess I will see over the next 6 months how my weight changes.

 

[Steve The Bluesman]

I started out a natural consistent weight of around 215lb after cycling for aprox. 2.5 years off and on I am sitting around 225-230 been off for well over 7 months. I maxed out at 255lbs, then settled at 235-240lb on average. I never tried to gain mass just bring up certain points of my physique. I guess I will see over the next 6 months how my weight changes.

I found the same. I cut hard before my 1st cycle and got down to my old fighting weight of 163. After the 1st cycle and PCT I maintained 173. After the 2nd cycle and PCT I am maintaining 182.

I guess I will see over the nexxt few months if I can hold that weight (at least until my next cycle.)

I think for the non-comp user, as long as you are not right at or over your body's limit (like, being 5-5, 230lbs) then you should be able to maintain a decent amount of the gains made - or at least I hope so.


Bluesman

 

[PatBateman3]

But my point is that the physiques cannot and will not remain the same without the constant addition of gear, unless you are not at your natural potential. Interesting that there are theories out there that you can actually shift that natural level a bit with the aid of gear.

 

[swordfish151]

But my point is that the physiques cannot and will not remain the same without the constant addition of gear, unless you are not at your natural potential. Interesting that there are theories out there that you can actually shift that natural level a bit with the aid of gear.

very good points in this thread....look at arnold..then and now...take his shirt off now and yikes!!! but good read.

 

[Anybody]

But my point is that the physiques cannot and will not remain the same without the constant addition of gear, unless you are not at your natural potential. Interesting that there are theories out there that you can actually shift that natural level a bit with the aid of gear.

I've read some stuff saying that long-term test use actually makes you more sensitive to future test use. This might not shift your natural max at all, but would give you bigger gains for each cycle, making it take longer to drop back down to your natural limit. Here's something on it.

"This argument is used to explain the fact that growth eventually stops while using a given amount of steroid. Once you understand all of the effects of testosterone on growth factor levels and muscle cells you come to realize that the opposite is in fact the case. Simply stated, supraphysiological levels of testosterone gives rise to increased numbers of myonuclei and thereby an increase in the number of total androgen receptors per muscle fiber. Therefore, the larger you get from using steroids, the more receptive your muscle become to the presence of testosterone. Keep in mind that I am referring to testosterone and testosterone esters."

 

[Tweakle]

you come off, you lose it.

Look at Yates today.. 10 x better genes than anyone here and he still dropped to around 210ish when cleaning out.

 

[LT3]

Muscle can never turn to fat and vice versa. if you turned softer and smoother after the cycle is coz of estrogen rebound. also i think gh gives you more muscle tissue so that would increase your genetic limit.

 

[Sir-Que]

"Myth: If you stop working out, muscle will turn into fat. Many people believe that if they stop working out, their muscle will turn into fat. Muscle and fat are two distinct tissues, however, and never can be converted from one to the other. If you stop exercising, muscle tissue will shrink, so you may feel flabbier. Also, when muscles get smaller, they do not need as many calories, so your metabolism slows. With a slower metabolism, if you eat the same amount of calories, you may gain body fat."

"Myth No. 2: muscle turns to fat when you don't exercise
For those who spend three or four days a week sweating through cardio and strength training, what happens to the muscle when you stop working out? Does it turn to fat?
Fitness guru Donna Richardson Joyner explained that this can't happen. "Muscle is muscle, fat is fat and you can't turn one into the other," she said.
It's a source of confusion for many, but there's no comparison deep inside the body. Dr Walter Thompson, a professor of exercise science at Georgia State University, said muscle is much denser then fat and is more compact.
He said that when you stop working out the muscle becomes a bit flabby and "non-functional", but does not turn into fat.
And if you're hoping for the opposite, sorry but exercise does not transform fat into muscle.
"You have to get rid of fat by doing cardio", said Lara Szymanski at The Sports Club in LA, "You have to build lean muscle and that's what you do by strength training."

Anyone have anything to say to the contrary?[/QUOTE]

This is my understanding as well......

SQ-

 

[superqt4u2nv]

you come off, you lose it.

Look at Yates today.. 10 x better genes than anyone here and he still dropped to around 210ish when cleaning out.

Only if you shut yourself down or stop training with the same intensity. I would say guys should be able to keep a fair amount of the cycle gains as long as every thing remains in check. You think Yates trains the same now as when he was Mr.Olympia?

 

[LVTitan]

Ok, but how many cycles a year do you have to complete to stay where you want to be above 140? I guess truly it would depend on what your goal weight was, so that's kind of a stupid question, but just curious.

2-3 cycles a year will keep me happy.

 

[LVTitan]

you're joking right? Are you really short?

no, just really small statured... well kinda short, i'm 5 7"..
at 150 most people think i'm around 180. my own doctor asked me the other day he said he guessed my weight at 180, i was 140. he said "well i know muscle weighs more, and it's obvious you have a lot of muscle"
at 155lbs, i seriously looked jacked. people said i had that freaky look, i couldnt believe it, but 150 looks very big on my frame.
i had 16" arms and my waist under 30"
carth has seen me, and can tell you i look bigger than i am.

 

[Steve The Bluesman]

very good points in this thread....look at arnold..then and now...take his shirt off now and yikes!!! but good read.

That is very true. I noticed the same thing about Zane. He was in Men's Health or something, shrunk to about 160 with little muscle. But you also have to remember, these guys are old, both pushing 60, and we know what happens to natural test production when you get to that age...Arnold still looked strong in T3 (though he must have been juicing to the gills to get in that shape.)


Bluesman