Quote:
Originally Posted by sitries  it will be interesting to see what others opinion is on this. My experience kind of supports this view really. 1st cycle - start weight - 12stone end weight - 13.9stone! 2 years went by and then i started another cycle. start weight - 12.3stone weight 9 weeks in - 13.3.
so going by this evidence, i kept very little of the weight that i gained on the initial cycle. You must take into account however that i was travelling for 14months out of that 24 and i was out on the piss and training very little. If i hadnt of doen the 1st cycle then i think i would of been 11.5 stone when i got bk from travelling. therefore overall, i think the steroids have increased my baseweight. |
No, whats happeend is your first cycle you streached your muscle facilia (is that how its spelt), your muscle cells volumized gave you additional size and weight.
Now, you finish your cycle no more hormones to suport that mass, the mass goes down (its mostly water and nutrents anyway). however your muscle facilia is still streached... so 2 years later you go back on the sauce and your body fills the facilia easly and gives you even more growth..
That said its not the optimal way to do it, probably doing a short burst cycle that streaches the muscle facilia induces some growth then recover wait a bit then do the same thing again, your quickly get to your old size and streach the facilia some more. rince repeat.
See thats what people are saying when they talk about the bro-ism of "muscle memory" its not that the muscle cells magicly rember that there for-fathers were once masive its the facilia that is essentialy saggy that meens that the muscle bellies get much fuller compaired to the first run when the nutrents are forced into them from the medication.
I think thats how it works anyway. Nobody realy knows for sure.