I find that the only real reason to start with a low dose say of sust 250 is to determine your reaction to it. If your "receptors" are virgin and ready then they can handle more and do more with it.

On the other hand they may be stimuated much easier making for faster gains.

If we follow the argument given to new people to the sport, start low you will get the same response as the old timers but with lower doses. Then wouldn't that make sense that every time you clean your receptors out (no more juice in system) that this argument would hold true as well.

A person should find his optimal dose on his first venture and then use that dose throughout his/her career. There is a point of diminishing return where the dosages are high and the increase in gains is minimal.
But there is also a point of diminishing returns on doses that are too low.

The argument that you are new and so 250 mg of sust will act like 500 is not true. 250 is 250.

We need a study of the efficacy of doses remembering that it is different for each person and that are suggestions for starting doses is based on personal experience.

Okay, I babbled enough.

chesty

If you could gather 100 bodybuilders, and follow them for say five years, keeping track of there cycles, dosages, moods, physiology and so forth and compare there health to the health of an average person of same years, I bet you would find that the bodybuilders as a whole would be healthier and look much better. Hell I have been lifting all my life and except for some graying people still place me in my mid to late 20's (I am 35)

When my dad was thirty five he looked 45-50. So I know the life style works, and the drugs work even better.

Will an open study ever be done? Probably not, the politicians have too much to lose, the physicians don't want to be proven that they are wrong, (ever wondered why a doctor PRACTICES medicine) and so forth. What a shame, it could improve the quality of life for so many people.

chesty

I say stay at low dosages until they are not giving you satisfactory gains. I would also like to tap on the subject of "what are good gains during a cycle", but that is a whole other argument.

------------------
Check out my Injection and Syringe Info Page:

http://2thick.elitefitness.com

I agree that the body will adapt to its environment. That is why the best of us train instinctively. Once it becomes accustomed to a drug, it takes more of the drug to attain the desired effect. I don't know much about cleaning out receptors, but I do believe in not using the same cycle and dosages as in the past. As with training vary your routine cycle to cycle and keep the body guessing. It is this adaptation that takes place that I believe makes us stronger and better.

chesty

I am a believer in start low and see how your body reacts. Increase as you go and switch things up. In 1 year, I passed up a lot of people at my gym. I know I am doing it right, especially when guys who have over 5 years experience with juice approach me and ask what I am doing.

------------------
<< The body wants to go to equilibrium>>

Metabolism 1985 Jun;34(6):571-3

The effect of anabolic steroids on lean body mass: the dose response curve.

Forbes GB

Data from human subjects given various amounts of anabolic steroids show that the resultant increment in lean body mass (LBM) has the features of a typical dose response curve. Low doses produce a very modest effect, while large doses result in a progressive augmentation of the LBM. Endogenous testosterone production during male adolescence is accompanied by a sex differential in LBM that is comparable to the LBM increment generated by exogenous steroids given to adults.

In the full text of this study(which Duchaine used to advocate 1000mg/wk doses) it shows that more LBM accrues with higher doses, especially at doses that near and exceed 2000mg/cycle.

thanks

chesty