Ummm technically MPS and full body protein synthesis is on 24/7. There’s always protein turnover going on in the body. It’s elevated after training and no, it’s not constantly in a highly elevated state on gear.
Where do you guys come up with this stuff?
I love the guy but CT’s natty vs enhanced articles talk about it. Here’s a paragraph from Training Natties vs Training Juicers
Frequency Per Muscle
Anabolic drugs turn on protein synthesis and it stays elevated pretty much 24/7, meaning that steroid users don’t need to hit a muscle as often to get maximum growth. A natural lifter will have elevated protein synthesis in a muscle only when he trains that muscle, and it stays elevated for 24-36 hours.
As such, a natural lifter should train a muscle 2-3 times per week for maximum growth, whereas an enhanced lifter can grow just fine hitting a muscle hard once a week. (Though I still believe that hitting it twice per week will be better.)
I’m not trying to put two coaches’ philosophies against each other or get you to critique or address CT’s stuff, but this is where I’ve read the protein synthesis stuff.
I have been trying to get to the whole picture of this right from when I started in this thread: What makes gainz?
If hormones, let’s just talk about all hormones, contribute to a large variety to what goes on in our bodies, surely we should at least consider the role gear in training!?
I agree, CT seems to talk about it, many other authors on TNation before in different ways, and I may link a video which we can use to disect:
Yeah I’ve never seen any data to support that statement.
Are you referring to gear and gains ?
I think these and it’s linked research gives us quite a picture:
Variable results have also been documented regarding the impact of AAS administration on muscle and fiber size. Although some studies have reported no change [29,36,38,39] or even a decrease [14] in fiber size following steroid treatment, most have demonstrated a significant increase in muscle mass and fiber size [12,25,28,34,37,40,41]. The present study supports an AAS-induced hypertrophic effect in all three muscles, regardless of their metabolic/contractile profile.
AAS administration has been shown to increase muscle protein synthesis [42,43] and ultimately muscle mass. This increase in muscle mass is predominantly the result of muscle fiber hypertrophy [28] and involves satellite cell activation and incorporation into the muscle fiber [44]. In the present study, mesterolone treatment alone resulted in hypertrophy of most fiber types and significant increases in the wet weights of all three muscles. Compared to AAS-treatment alone, the high-intensity exercise protocol caused comparable increases in fiber sizes and wet weight of all three muscles.
Which leads me to the question:
What triggers gainz, type of training, COMPARING enhanced to naturals, or are they (triggers) the same?
Do you think CT has seen some data that you haven’t?
Those are animal studies.
I asked Scott, who is the biggest research hound on the planet and he linked me to animal studies too. As of right now, I haven’t seen a single study in resistance trained males that shows that MPS is maximally elevated literally all the time. Not one.
Hm, the implications of that would be a ballchanger for numerous statements concerning AAS! ( I certainly would like to get to the bottom of that)
Let‘s stick with naturals for now:
Do we agree on once cortisol kicks in, protein synthesis is hindered?!
Isn’t that part of CT‘S neurotype training?
Sympathetic and parasympathetic nerves, cortisol, metabolic stress, systemic recovery… all leads to the postulated 8-10 sets for optimal gainz…for pretty much who/ all?!
Supplements are a game changer? Leucine and glycine, just to name two?!
What you quoted there isn’t saying anything to support your point.
I don’t know anything from personal experience since I have never used steroids, but I have heard from some coaches who work with both natural and enhanced lifters (such as Josh Bryant and Chad Wesley Smith) that practically speaking the only difference will be the results. If you were to continue the same program, same sets, reps, and weight, as you did as a natural lifter and then take drugs then yes, you would recover faster but the thing is that you are going to get much stronger at a much faster rate and this means that your rate of systemic recovery will remain approximately the same.
In fact, in many cases you have guys like Eric Lilliebridge who can’t bench heavy every week and there is a guy in his 50s named Leon Brown who benches 500 and holds multiple IPF records and he benches 3 times a week. Does Eric need more steroids?
Well,
Let’s say it’s Ben Halsall who makes a strong stand for elevated MPS🤪
Following him he should do more to drive nutrients to the muscles, I interpret.
Since when is hypertrophy linked to maximal strength?
Since the dawn of creation.
I don’t know who the hell that is, but nobody is disputing that MPS will be elevated. The thing is that you are saying that MPS is elevated 24/7, and the only way that is possible is if you are walking around with an IV stuck in your arm.
Also, MPS doesn’t equal muscle growth. It’s necessary for muscle growth, but just because MPS is occurring doesn’t mean that your muscles are actually growing.
I beg to differ! Hypertrophy is not equal to maximal power!
You’re changing your story, nobody said it was “equal”. And nobody said anything about power.
Why are strength sports divided by weight classes then if muscle size is irrelevant?
You sound like someone who would do well to shut up and listen rather than trying to tell other people how it goes because you are wrong about just about everything.
Statements like these are straight rude and don’t add to the topic!
And you preaching false information adds something?
This is more or less the point I am trying to make.
Yes this is a strength based comparison but it’s still a good one. Because we’re still talking about recovery. And if Eric could bench more, and recover, he would. But with his heavy squats and deads, his systemic recovery is impaired by that. And that’s the area that is actually the most important. Because when you’re in recovery debt systemically, there is going to be decrease in performance. And this decrease in performance still plays a major factor in terms of muscular growth because if you are’t getting any stronger within the growth rep ranges, then you’re not going to grow.
MPS, I don’t believe, is ever going to be shown to be maximally elevated due to androgens in a 24/7 type span. I don’t know if that’s what Thibs is meaning, but if he is he’s wrong and there’s no data to support that. Not yet anyway. Not in human studies. I would side with the theory that on androgens it is elevated maximally for longer periods of time post training, but not all the time…just sitting around doing nothing. Elevated more than someone completely natural? Sure.
I think the metaphor there would be someone who is 180 with a high degree of muscle mass and someone who is 180 with very little muscle mass and a skinny-fat body comp.
The former guy is going to burn more calories just sitting around than the other guy is going to. But when the more jacked guy performs cardio or lifts, he’s going to be burning a lot more than the other guy as well, simply due to the physiological difference in their body. Androgens I think would be similar to this regarding MPS. MPS might be higher than the natty guy, but it’s not going to be literally maximized 24/7 365. Again, there’s no data to support this notion.
Regarding this point, for anyone who doesn’t know, Eric Lillibridge does one hard work set on either squats or deadlifts each week (not both) and that’s it, and just a bit of bodybuilding work. I’m doing significantly more volume than that, but if I start taking steroids, gain 60lbs and my lifts go up by 20% then it’s ludicrous to think I could get away doing even more volume.
My knowledge on that is limited, but from what I understand the level of MPS is related to the stimulus from training and in this case androgen levels will play a major role. That’s why I’m saying you would need an IV, because androgen levels are going to go up and then back down between doses. And of course the acute stimulus from training is going to decrease as time passes.
When a steroid is ingested, it moves through the blood stream to the muscle, where it is pulled into an androgen receptor, which is the muscle cell’s receiving port. It can begin to interact with the DNA of the cell the moment it is transported to the muscle cell. The steroid will stimulate the protein synthesis process that stimulates cell growth.
By following the research quoted earlier,
AAS administration has been shown to increase muscle protein synthesis [42 ,43 ],
which was done on humans, I THINK ( and that is the topic of this thread, what is left to prove is the duration, i.e 24/7?
But as this is not the question, rather „what triggers growth, I get the feeling: Gear or not, there is a difference on how to train optimally for gainz?!