happywife1223
New member
@caleb_m You get what you put in. Protein synthesis, say for all natural, around 27g at a time within a 4-6 hr period. Protein synthesis on anabolic is greatly increased, ie, the harder you work to break the muscle down while on anabolics, the larger and faster the gain. When you see all or most of gains gone when off, you know they didn’t work, meaning the user, not the anabolic.
@caleb_m What is the control group? Athletes who have lifted heavy and currently lift heavy? Are they sedentary? Or are they light weight gym goers.
This is important, because people using/used anabolic steroids, probably did not go easy in the gym, and probably still don’t. This would affect cellular structures.
Overall sample size is low.
This is important, because people using/used anabolic steroids, probably did not go easy in the gym, and probably still don’t. This would affect cellular structures.
Overall sample size is low.
@pjvermont Sample size seems to fit the analysis. What’d your power analysis say?
truth_love
New member
mbahchidinma
New member
but my guess is that the mechanism of action is not hormonal per se, rather just increased tolerance to intense training. Again though just a guess from a noob.@mbahchidinma
It’s both, but one is a primary effect and the other secondary. The substances changed the anatomy of the cell (myonucleanated Type IIs, increased satellite cells on Type Is). The former will result in increased peaks (sprints, power, etc) while the latter will result in greater capacities.
Dosages weren’t controlled for, just length of use. Three years is much longer than a single cycle, but not outside the realm of someone whose livelihood depends on performance. With the less than sophisticated testing of CrossFit, there could easily be someone in the ranks on gear for that long.
EDIT: it should also be noted that one of the groups were former users, meaning they no longer use. You can look around at some of the qualifiers this year… I’m thinking of a certain individual specifically, who has literally no neck… And you could say..”hey, maybe they use steroids in the past.”
It’s both, but one is a primary effect and the other secondary. The substances changed the anatomy of the cell (myonucleanated Type IIs, increased satellite cells on Type Is). The former will result in increased peaks (sprints, power, etc) while the latter will result in greater capacities.
Dosages weren’t controlled for, just length of use. Three years is much longer than a single cycle, but not outside the realm of someone whose livelihood depends on performance. With the less than sophisticated testing of CrossFit, there could easily be someone in the ranks on gear for that long.
EDIT: it should also be noted that one of the groups were former users, meaning they no longer use. You can look around at some of the qualifiers this year… I’m thinking of a certain individual specifically, who has literally no neck… And you could say..”hey, maybe they use steroids in the past.”
chickenlittle
New member
@caleb_m A positive test for steroids is just be tip if the iceberg and really doesn’t tell us much about an athlete at all. Cycling on and off for long term gains and to avoid positive tests had been a part of steroids use for as long as steroids have been involved in competitive sports. This research is just more evidence to support that any use of banned substance at any time creates an edge. The onus is on the sport to keep up testing, currently a joke in CrossFit, and on the athletes for making the decision to use. A lot of jacked people got jacked through steroids long before competing in CrossFit, and were happy to celebrate anyone who lasts a drug test no matter how worthless the test. I don’t even know where I’m going with this, but I’m out little sport, there’s a lot more to the story for any athlete behind positive and negative tests.