i am not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone because i dont know enough about this stuff to do so, however squatty's post got me thinking. i did some research and found these quotes from Bill Roberts in regards to the a/a ratio. im not sure if this is relevant:
"I could look up the values for relative effect on rat prostate (so-called androgenic index) and rat levator ani (so-called anabolic index) and tell you the ratio, but the ratio is of little meaning. It would be best to forget the entire concept and instead to focus on actually relevant facts such as whether a given androgen is metabolized by 5alpha reductase or not, and if so to what effect, what observed stacking behavior the compound has with other steroids, whether the compound aromatizes, etc."
"Also don't worry about so-called "anabolic/androgenic ratios"... these are in fact the ratios of activity in the levator ani of the rat (a non-skeletal muscle, that doesn't respond at all the same as skeletal muscle, which is analogous to the pubococcygeous (PCG) muscle in man) to the activity in the prostate and/or seminal vesicles of the rat. As it happens, the "anabolic" value is not a very good predictor of efficacy for athletes in muscle anabolism, and the "androgenic" value is not a very good predictor of adverse side effects either. So in other words, each number is a rather poor predictor, and the ratio is no better. I would forget about it completely."