Trained muscle responds better to steroids?

[jasonleeson]

I was reading Greg Valentino's book and there is a throwaway sentence in there where he's talking about how he'd trained naturally for 23 years and that:

'Well trained muscle responds better to roids'.

Also, there is a similar sentence in a report I read:

'Trained muscle also responds better to steroids due to it containing more steroid receptors.'


So can anyone shed anymore light on this + go into any more detail? I'd like to know more!

 

[Teutonic]

I d say....he s correct.

 

[Bullseye Forever]

sounds very interesting

 

[randy841]

Says a lot about maximizing one's natural potential first before moving to AAS to break plateaus. I trained naturally for nearly 14 years (on/off), then decided to do Test/Anavar cycle and had tremendous results. I kept half the body weight and most of the strength. Most young kids come in nowadays when they are 17, 18, 21 looking for short cuts, when they are not ready.

 

[jasonleeson]

I d say....he s correct.

Lmao. Thanks!

 

[jasonleeson]

I liked this response

'Well an untrained muscle has less mitochondria, less capiliarisation, less cellular cytoplasm, less ATP/area ratio, less myosin heavy chain content, and has a higher peercentage of smaller slow twitch fibers, lower glycogen, phosphocreatine and IMF storage capacity, fewer androgen receptors... many more subtle differences too. As for how these might relate to the difference in response to supraphysiological levels of hormones am not sure exactly, but it makes sense to me that due to the adaptations training causes that a trained muscle would be more primed to respond to such hormones.'

 

[Mudge]

A person who knows training/diet responds better to 'supplements' of any kind, but I believe androgen receptors/uptake also increase with training.

 

[DarkCurse]

hey look its mudge