Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
Why is it that after starting a cycle, at about week 6-8...no more gains? You some how maintain while on gear going into the 10 and on week but no more gains. Why?
Why does gear stop working after a while?
- Thread starter Smokescreen
- Start date
theoak01
New member
I think your body just adapts to the new levels of hormones in your body,kinda like when it starts to get hard to add weight naturally ,I prefer longer cycles though because I feel it helps me maintain alot longer than if I go on for say 8 weeks and come off without giving my body a chance to get use to the new weight.
just my take on this anyway
just my take on this anyway
Von Zipperr
New member
it makes no sense what some people say on here, it gets me so confused. "Test will kick in around week 4", "Gains usually stop around week 6" I believe after week 4 till 12 gains just get better.
mrflexdiesel
New member
A majority of drugs taken have a action/reaction period. Times are different depending on the compound taken, but steroids and other performance enhancers tend to go problem free for about 2-4 weeks before other factors in your body start to react to the newly acquired levels of hormones or what not. Your body will attempt to stay in a state of homeostasis so if your testosterone levels are jacked after awhile your body will try and compensate for those high levels by also increasing your estrogen and cortisol levels. Both of these levels if not kept in check will dramatically reduce the amount of gains that can be made. Beyond at, if these levels are also not kept in check towards the end of your cycle and post-cycle you are even worse yet bound to lose alot of the gains you made during your cycle, because after the exogenous testosterone is discontinued your body's normal production is quite low to even non-existent, and estrogen and cortisol levels will remain high if not even bounce higher for awhile.
calveless wonder
New member
mrflexdiesel said:
makes sense...but what's the best way to keep cortisol levels down aside from taking another AAS?
recptors down-regulation..........which mean a decrease in the cells drug recptors, becuase of the extra drug in the body. you can solve the problem with upping the drug dose. that dosent mean than people with many cycles will not get results from low doses. the body up-regulat receptors and bring body to homeostasis after you stop taking the drug or AAS in this case.
that dosent mean that the all drugs lose it effects by time, some steroids take some time to give its effect in body., when the steroid bind to a receptor inside the cell it affects the gene transcription and translation in body to activate a kinase, utilzing proteins. this is a slow process whch take time. that why some aas is said to take an effect after 4-5 weeks.
that dosent mean that the all drugs lose it effects by time, some steroids take some time to give its effect in body., when the steroid bind to a receptor inside the cell it affects the gene transcription and translation in body to activate a kinase, utilzing proteins. this is a slow process whch take time. that why some aas is said to take an effect after 4-5 weeks.
Last edited:
GoldenDelicious
New member
mmm dont agree with the cortisol angle
could be anything. just off the top of my head sort of thing:
negative feedback somewhere along the growth initiation/propagation cascade, whether at the receptor level or way further down the line before protein synthesis
some sort of consumptive deficit, ie using up your bodys stores of some needed cofactor, reagent or whatever, and not being able to replenish it
changes in distribution over time- there is nothing to say taht the distribution of the drug in the tissues- particularly the tissue containing the site of drug action- will stay the same. maybe it changes in such a way as to retard growth
some sort of metabolite produced, or some other hormone negating growth produced. yes teh cortisol argument fits in here, but the reason i disagreed with it earlier is beacuse i havnt heard of high cortisol being associated with AAS use per se
also other growth hormone/factor production may be inhibited/retarded
or it could come down to other factors like: people just stop eating enough to maintain growth, get burnt out at the gym without realising it....
or it could be all of the above. for all we know the very hypothesis is bullshit because the effect we are talking about (decreasing gains post week 8) might not actually occur in the first place (at least, it doesnt for everyone, of that i am convinced) as well as a few otehr inter-individual variance factors. people arent all the same. different aspects may manifest differently.
who knows.
could be anything. just off the top of my head sort of thing:
negative feedback somewhere along the growth initiation/propagation cascade, whether at the receptor level or way further down the line before protein synthesis
some sort of consumptive deficit, ie using up your bodys stores of some needed cofactor, reagent or whatever, and not being able to replenish it
changes in distribution over time- there is nothing to say taht the distribution of the drug in the tissues- particularly the tissue containing the site of drug action- will stay the same. maybe it changes in such a way as to retard growth
some sort of metabolite produced, or some other hormone negating growth produced. yes teh cortisol argument fits in here, but the reason i disagreed with it earlier is beacuse i havnt heard of high cortisol being associated with AAS use per se
also other growth hormone/factor production may be inhibited/retarded
or it could come down to other factors like: people just stop eating enough to maintain growth, get burnt out at the gym without realising it....
or it could be all of the above. for all we know the very hypothesis is bullshit because the effect we are talking about (decreasing gains post week 8) might not actually occur in the first place (at least, it doesnt for everyone, of that i am convinced) as well as a few otehr inter-individual variance factors. people arent all the same. different aspects may manifest differently.
who knows.
GoldenDelicious said:
actually it is the negative feedback mechanism. the master gland (hypothalamus) will detect the excess drug in the body, so it will reduces its LRH which effect the pituitary gland (Luteinizing hormone), then medulla cortex and gonads to reduce its androgen production or its androgen sensitivity through receptors down regulation.
Hormone secretion is controlled by three major types of inputs to endocrine cells
-Changes in the plasma concentrations of mineral ions or organic nutrients
-Neurotransmitters released from neurons impinging on the endocrine cell
-Another hormone or neurohormone acting on the endocrine cell
GoldenDelicious
New member
true, but not guaranteed to be the only source of the observed effect.
in the case of increasing incident drug molecules sufficiently to still produce the same overall post receptor messaging intensity, thereby negating the negative feedback on the receptors as you described, then teh decerease in growth must be caused by other factors.
of course as i stated previously teh observed effect itself is suspect, but for arguments sake, what i described in this post stands, and im not saying youre wrong. but i wouldnt bet too much money on negative feedback being the only cause, if teh cause at all
in the case of increasing incident drug molecules sufficiently to still produce the same overall post receptor messaging intensity, thereby negating the negative feedback on the receptors as you described, then teh decerease in growth must be caused by other factors.
of course as i stated previously teh observed effect itself is suspect, but for arguments sake, what i described in this post stands, and im not saying youre wrong. but i wouldnt bet too much money on negative feedback being the only cause, if teh cause at all
GoldenDelicious
New member
just realised i might come across badly in that post.
in an exam question in, say, pharmacology, youre right. in an exam question in pharmacogenetics/pharmacogenomics, you left out the theorising and the bullshit that we're meant to think about, and stated absolutely that the negative feedback is the only cause, when in fact it may only be a contributor. perhaps the greatest contributor, but still.
what year are you in, x_muscle?
in an exam question in, say, pharmacology, youre right. in an exam question in pharmacogenetics/pharmacogenomics, you left out the theorising and the bullshit that we're meant to think about, and stated absolutely that the negative feedback is the only cause, when in fact it may only be a contributor. perhaps the greatest contributor, but still.
what year are you in, x_muscle?
GoldenDelicious
New member
explain that to a diabeticE-Swift25 said:
Goodfellow
New member
Just what does AR downregulation have to do with a diabetic?
GoldenDelicious said:
i just got accepted in pharmacy school and i will start next fall, i didnt get a BS degree even. i jumped from my junior (biochemistry) year to pharmacy school. so there is a lot to be learned yet
. keep it coming these debate encourage me to study and learn more.GoldenDelicious
New member
dont worry about the debates, get a job in a pharmacy. the biggest obstable is being bored to tearsx_muscle said:i just got accepted in pharmacy school and i will start next fall, i didnt get a BS degree even. i jumped from my junior (biochemistry) year to pharmacy school. so there is a lot to be learned yet
goodfellow: receptor downregulation does in fact occur, and is important in adult diabetes
Great thread with some good info.
based on experience, no cycle of mine will go beyond the 5-6 wks mark. Cycles will be short, high dose, and all fast acting gear.
I make 90% of my gains in the first 5-6 wks of any longer cycle. Its just not worth it in my eyes to stay on longer than the 6 wk mark, and continue to stay shut down for an extra pound or 3. I would rather get in, hard and quick, get out, and start recovering. Just my 2 cents.
Mavy
based on experience, no cycle of mine will go beyond the 5-6 wks mark. Cycles will be short, high dose, and all fast acting gear.
I make 90% of my gains in the first 5-6 wks of any longer cycle. Its just not worth it in my eyes to stay on longer than the 6 wk mark, and continue to stay shut down for an extra pound or 3. I would rather get in, hard and quick, get out, and start recovering. Just my 2 cents.
Mavy
GoldenDelicious
New member
AlwaysOn said:
so what? and i wouldnt say its by name only. they serve a similar purpose via a similar mechanism. same rules apply.
anyway lets not discuss it. i ahve made myself clear in other threads about this, and they were quite long. bottom line is taht it happens, but is not as significant as people think. the whole 'recharge receptors' theory is crap, but regardless, downregulation will happen.
Big Rick Rock
istrator
If this is true, than how is it that the Pros continue to make gains even after being on for years ? Could it be maybe adding the GH and Insulin along with the AAS use?
Please discuss amongst yourselves.
Please discuss amongst yourselves.
GoldenDelicious
New member
brr as above. could be anything. different individuals have different physiological parameters. just go through list above and say how a certain person may not be subject ot that particular aspect, factor in dose, and there you go
its too late for this lol
its too late for this lol
GoldenDelicious said:
but this isn't true at all. downregulation will NOT occur. There is no mechanism by which it would occur.
sorry for being so rough, but its best to nip misinformation right away for the general good.
"Downregulation", in reality is caused by something else entirely...too frequent cycles does not allow your LH outputs to stabilize.
Last edited:
GoldenDelicious
New member
alwayson im quite aware of the different mechanisms by which receptor downregulation can occur. i would not be so hasty as to make a comment like "it doesnt occur" because i have seen even my former professors do a backflip when a new piece of data is presented to them
receptor downregulation is a body wide phenomenon. there is no reason it wouldnt occur in the case of the steroid hormones.
receptor downregulation is a body wide phenomenon. there is no reason it wouldnt occur in the case of the steroid hormones.
Similar threads
