There are some blessed individuals out there in every field of endeavour.
I'm sure some respond better to a lower dose of anabolics than others, that wasn't really what I was focusing on(though I may not have expressed that cleary).
I think the genetic factor with bodybuilding is more strongly about the muscle bellies, shape, attachment, clavicle width, hip width etc. That being said response to drugs is a factor. When competing at Pro level I'd say the majority of them rate highly in all forms of genetic advantages.
I was more in disbelief about the long period of abstinence from any anabolics, during the long length of break between cycles. No mention of hcg on cycle, or blasting at the end before PCT. After 20 weeks "on" his natural test production is going to be shut down hard.
When Victor Martinez spent 7 months (28 odd weeks)in Immigration detention without PED's, his usual diet, and no weights, he came out looking a shadow of his competitive self. Even with all his usual drugs etc he was not able to get back in shape for the next Olympia(can be seen in the movie Generation Iron). He definitely put back on a lot of muscle in a short period of time, but he just didn't have the size to make him competitive.
There is definitely a big range of what a Pro is. Having qualified and got a Pro card is one thing, it doesn't necessarily mean you are good enough to qualify for an Olympia, let alone place.
I enjoy Ron Harris's writing. I applaud him for being pretty much the only mainstream bodybuilding reporter to talk about his own experiences with anabolics. That gives him plenty of credit with me, but it also doesn't mean I believe everything he says when it comes to Pro drug usage.
Many bodybuilding writers "ghost write" articles supposedly by the Pro's. Its been like that since the start of bodybuilding magazines.How much input the actual Pro give, I don't know. Anything from 0% -99%.