Can anyone answer these questions? .... Who believes all the available ARs in muscle tissue are saturated during an average dose cycle? Do different AAS have different effects on the AR or is the AR either activated or not activated? .. I've been thinking of something latly and i was just wondering what everyone thought about this. thanks
AR saturation and AR activation
- Thread starter MANTUS
- Start date
I don't believe so bro. There have been many debates about the down regulation of AR, but I've never seen any real facts. In fact in might be the contrary based on some things I have read.
OK .. what i was thinking is ... 1st i was using EQ and then threw in some Tren about 4 weeks in,and i started EQ at very high doses. I was wondering if the EQ that was already in my system could have been taking up the ARs that the Tren should be in. Well i stopped the EQ and i'll just be staying with the Tren for many weeks more. The EQ made me feel like shit .. tired, .. well mostly tired which is bad enough and it didn't do much for my sexdrive which i didn't think it would anyway,but now after 2 weeks of Tren my sexdrive is coming back and i feel better. I am starting to get nightsweats again and aggression but just enough to be a good thing. I was basically thinking that if most of the ARs are getting saturated with the androgens,it mind as well be with Tren. .. I know some say Estrogen can upregulate the AR and androgens downregulate them and others say ,Androgens can upregulate and estrogen downregulate ... I say if anything upregulates the AR,it is the androgens. .Well i know i love Tren,i can tell you that
Estrogen would probably down regulate the AR and by your theory EQ wouldn't take up many of the AR receptors becuase it's not very high on the androgen scale...although tren on the other hand is highly androgenic.
Well, I honestly think it's more so the increasing muscle mass that you have on your frame it takes more to maintain it or just the simple fact that most do it prematurely.If AR downregulated many would lose mass simply maintaining a certain amount of gear or would make close to no gains with the addition of gear (because based on what that theory suggests the more gear you use the more receptors that are used and there are none left for additional benefits of the extra gear.)
I just don't buy it...
I just don't buy it...
S
saudades
Guest
I would agree with Biggerstronger. Can a muscle cell increase its number of receptors? I would think that it couldn't, at least immediately--perhaps it takes some time to adapt (which would explain large increases in size again after being off cycle for a long time). I believe the key is that hypertrophy increases the size of the muscle, and so it's requirements also increase. Because the number of receptors on any given muscle cell is limited, it is also limited in protein synthesis so its growth slows down as it grows larger. If you can increase the number of muscle fibers (hyperplasia), you have new fibers with new receptors that can be activated and thus grow larger. If we always had hyperplasia along with hypertrophy, we'd all get big really fast. Since we don't, the receptors on the fibers we have can only send the message for protein synthesis so much at a time so the larger a muscle is, growth would slow down until the number of receptors increased. That's my hypothesis.
Actually from what I have read it was shown that in the presense of high androgen levels there was actually an upregulation of AR's meaning that the old recepters would be there for a much greater time and more would also be produced.
TomSizeMore
New member
there is definitely a correlation between androgens and upregulation of AR's. been shown in many many studies.
Similar threads
