Regarding short cycles and Androgen Receptor Down Regulation

Greetings,

I’m writing to directly inquire about the claims made by Taien Clark and other short-cycle advocates. They argue that the actual anabolic efficacy of anabolics lasts only around 8 weeks before some form of homeostasis or loss of sensitivity occurs. As a result, they contend that maximizing net anabolism over the course of a year requires cyclical dosage protocols, such as repeating 6 weeks on and 4 weeks of administration of a longer Esther. Or otherwise titrating from higher to lower levels intentionally.

However, I’ve been unable to find any scientific literature supporting this view beyond historical bodybuilding practices. Is there credible evidence or a solid physiological rationale for preferring this short-cycle approach over longer cycles?

Additionally, is there actually any unique response that occurs upon the reintroduction of androgens after a cruise? Some have suggested that while anabolics are initially strongly anabolic, they gradually shift toward primarily being anti-catabolic over time. Is there evidence to support this idea?

2 comments