T Nation

Age-Old Roid Question...


Does AAS get you to your natural peak faster or does it help you pass your natural peak, or both? I'm just not sure that we, as a community of users, are sure about this. It seems like the kids that take the AAS fit into the first category and the vets that tell the kids to train until they plateau are in the second category.

Personally I'm not exactly clear on what is considered to be common knowledge or if there is any accepted common knowledge about this.


Your natural peak can only be attained naturally. Natural peak is more of a made up term meaning spot in your physical development where it is not likely you can progress much more without steroids


So I assume you do believe steroids can take you there faster as well then, right?

I'm not 100% certain I agree with you actually. But I don't disagree either, I just don't have the personal experience because I didn't start on the AAS until I trained naturally for quite some time. I also don't believe I am anywhere near my peak now, even if I never touched AAS again I would get stronger.


I believe steroids would definitely get you there faster. With hard work steroids will greatly speed up the time it takes to get results, thus making you reach your "natural peak"(although it can no longer be considered your natural peak).

I think the "natural peak" is a myth, but is used to teach people that they should not workout for two weeks and then start AAS. Get some gains naturally, it'll take you farther. Once you have used them you really dont know what you could have achieved naturally, in many cases there is always room for progression, therefore never really having a peak, or a point that your progression stops.


I don't believe in any sort of glass ceiling, aka 'natural peak.' I believe in diminishing returns, but then simply learning more, or training in a better atmosphere can do wonders, probably better than juice.

It should be stated that I'm a powerlifter and not a bodybuilder though.

I'm relatively inexperienced with drugs, but it seems they increase your potential both in terms of outright size and rate of gain.


I completely agree with everything, except am a little hesitant about the phrase "probably better than juice". I honestly do not think any workout technique can surpass chemical enhancement, as long as the person who is "on" is working his ass off and eating correctly.


Steroids will make you progress faster regardless of where you are in your training. If someone just started lifting, they are definitely going to make progress on 500mg/wk of test then they are naturally--not that I am saying this is a good idea.

On the same note, they will help someone progress who has been lifting naturally for 20 years whose progress has slowed to pretty much zero.

As far as the natural limit goes, Like Whoa said, I don't think your progress would completely stop, however the diminishing returns eventually get so close to zero that you might as well say you are at a peak.


I completely agree with this.

I also don't believe that if you use before you hit your natural peak then you limit your steroid-assisted peak. This just doesn't make sense from a scientific or anecdotal standpoint, but you'll hear a lot of people use this as a reason not to use too young. I also don't think people who are too young should use, but for different physiological reasons.


I don't really disagree with that, but let me explain why I worded it the way I did.

I think any given 'workout technique' can work better with chemical enhancement, but if somebody is doing the wrong things in the gym, juice may very well not help as much as simply doing the right things.

natural+good partners+good program+hard work is grater than enhanced+no or bad partners+not so good program+hard work

In my gym, I've seen countless kids who do bodybuilding routines for years and appear to reach what they consider to be their genetic peak, but many of them choose to forgo the juice and instead train with the PLers. Getting around people who can show you how to do things is huge. And it's totally, totally different than being told or reading about it. These guys add a hundred pounds or more to their squats in a couple of months just by learning how to do it and being properly motivated. They stop caring about silly things and the iron piles on the bar and the muscle piles on their frames, lol. I don't see that happening with steroid use alone.


I've always heard your first cycle is your best cycle. With that being said vets want younger people to have a good solid base so that they get the 'most' out of their first cycle. Natural peak is impossible to judge really.


Late comer to the party. Clearly the answer is both. You progress faster and further on gear than off. What does it matter what you could achieve off gear? That's why you take gear.


Try doing a serious cycle and you'll change your mind probably by day 3.


No, I haven't done a serious cycle yet, but I've seen a few who have, and their gains weren't as great as the people who decided to put a heavier weight in their hands. That's all I'm saying.


I believe some people feel that your ultimate potential may be less if you use too soon.


Fair point. I believe your ultimate results will be less if you don't use at all :wink:


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


Lol, yeah that's definitely true. I don't personally believe it limits your potential, I've just seen it stated.


As I near 40 years of age, that "natural peak" is a frakkin' bitch. Though I intend in lifting into my 50's, the level of growth and development have slowed.

The question for me is: do I plug away all slow, or do I reach my goals much faster and enjoy them while I move on in age?


I think both. I don't understand the people who say not to use steroids before you have trained for many years and gained a lot naturally or they won't do anything. That's just not true. I don't think beginners should use, but they would get better results if they did.