Thoughts on AAS "too early"?

[Audioslave]

What is everyone's opinion on cycling "too early" affecting later cycles? Does anyone think that if someone were to cycle a couple of years before they hit their natural potential, it would affect cycles later on after they did reach that natural peak?

[Captain Equipoise]

What is everyone's opinion on cycling "too early" affecting later cycles? Does anyone think that if someone were to cycle a couple of years before they hit their natural potential, it would affect cycles later on after they did reach that natural peak?

How do you measure natural potential !?!.. 
I think the right time is a) if you're over 21 (and your bones have finished fully growing and fused)
and b) Once you build a solid foundation, of 3-4 years natural training..
My first cycle was at 22, after 3 years of natural training and getting up to a lean 210lbs. naturally.

[musclehedz]

Your natural potention is reached at about 35 when starting as a teenager (assuming you know how to train etc.)

[Van_Bilderass]

My controversial opinion: sensitivity to steroids is greatest in the teen years. If altering your set-point through drugs is possible that would be the time to do it, I suspect. A large number of bodybuilding's greatest went on cycles in their teens and had great careers.

I think cycling really early is a bad idea for a number of reasons but from a purely physical muscular view point I think waiting until you're 25 or whatever is less than ideal.

[Croatch]

Your natural potention is reached at about 35 when starting as a teenager (assuming you know how to train etc.)

How true.  You metabolism is much better for putting on mass after 25 or so.

[rocket]

What is everyone's opinion on cycling "too early" affecting later cycles? Does anyone think that if someone were to cycle a couple of years before they hit their natural potential, it would affect cycles later on after they did reach that natural peak?

There is probably not one guy on a pro stage who has reached their natural potential.  It takes too long.  If being big and quick is your goal you are best off not thinking about that and going for it when you are good and ready.  Being natural is mostly about the challenge of improving without distorting the experiment.. as opposed to say.. looking good. 

[GoneAway]

there is no too early. around 17 should be fine. people just think that ur gonna get shit gains by 'underutilising ur nat potential.' i say look at arnold, demayo, shawn ray, lee priest and all of the guys who won their teen class and later turned pro, which are a substantial number past and present.

[Captain Equipoise]

There is probably not one guy on a pro stage who has reached their natural potential.  It takes too long.  If being big and quick is your goal you are best off not thinking about that and going for it when you are good and ready.  Being natural is mostly about the challenge of improving without distorting the experiment.. as opposed to say.. looking good. 

Huh!?! those two equal the same thing..
improving in bodybuilding = looking good, and vice versa.

[knny187]

I prefer the Elliptical over Cycling

[Audioslave]

Sounds like we should all do six weeks of Prop and smile.

[slaveboy1980]

What is everyone's opinion on cycling "too early" affecting later cycles? Does anyone think that if someone were to cycle a couple of years before they hit their natural potential, it would affect cycles later on after they did reach that natural peak?

your too late.

[Arnold jr]

My controversial opinion: sensitivity to steroids is greatest in the teen years. If altering your set-point through drugs is possible that would be the time to do it, I suspect. A large number of bodybuilding's greatest went on cycles in their teens and had great careers.

I think cycling really early is a bad idea for a number of reasons but from a purely physical muscular view point I think waiting until you're 25 or whatever is less than ideal.

Good post...Truth!

Sounds like we should all do six weeks of Prop and smile.

That's not taking AAS...that's a slap in the face when you asked for a kiss.

[local hero]

my opinion is after 3 yrs of training naturaly your more or less as big as youl ever get, thats propper balls to the wall training and eating.. if u want to move on youve got to dabble..weather your a teen or a 25 yr old

[krazee]

my opinion is after 3 yrs of training naturaly your more or less as big as youl ever get, thats propper balls to the wall training and eating.. if u want to move on youve got to dabble..weather your a teen or a 25 yr old

Agreed but it also truly depends on your goals. Some just finally come to the relization that they will never become the next Ronnie or Jay for that matter. Everyone that starts bodybuilding is for the feel good and healthy approach. Some it is truly to be the next champ. When that line is drawn and your new goal is set, then and only then will one decide to "dabble". There is no compromise when deciding to do AAS, it's either feet first or don't even splash the water.

[local hero]

if im totaly honest i wished id went on heavy as a teen and earlier in age instead of waiting and stagnating, if i knew then what i know now id of done much better as a jnr and be alot further on than what i am now.

[DragonRider]

I prefer the Elliptical over Cycling

That's excellent.

[atr911]

As with all walks of life, you have decisions to make and consequences to those decisions.  Cycling early WILL affect your overall potential in a positive manner.  In your teens, your body is still developing.  Under normal circumstances test will only increase the overall size of a muscle fiber in an adult male.  In a teen male higher levels of test 'could' result in more new fibers being created as a part of natural growth.  My concern with youth cranking is not that it will have profound effects on their physique but rather their ability and potential to make mature and responsible decisions about their training and cycling.  I would be all for a doctor AND trainer guided cycle in a sixteen year old who shows potential.   Some things that a doctor and trainer could help with are ensuring dosages aren't in excess, training and form is proper, training will not stunt growth (going too heavy), and, amongst other things, proper cycling protocol is followed (cycling, bridging and/or PCT). After all, a cycle in your teens should only be used to lay a solid foundation for further endeavors into BB'ing (or any sport for that matter); Not to get  super huge, stupid quick.

Another issue to consider is money.  Not many parents will fund a cycle and not many kids make enough to fund a proper cycle themselves.

99% of kids these days don't have the level of maturity required to drive let alone play with hormones in  their bodies which will (notice WILL not MIGHT) have serious long term effects on their health.

Then again, 99% of people who are legally considered adults don't either...

[trab]

I think the above is prolly a reasonable template of the old Soviet and East block methods.
There were some interesting interviews with those Drs in Der Spiegal. I wish I'd kept them.

[local hero]

i read a few articles on the old east german and soviet methods,,, they had it down to a science...one thing that sticks in my head is the link between untrained forearm size and the likelyness to succed in weightlifting/power events..or somwhere along those lines, was all fascintating stuff

[trab]

i read a few articles on the old east german and soviet methods,,, they had it down to a science...one thing that sticks in my head is the link between untrained forearm size and the likelyness to succed in weightlifting/power events..or somwhere along those lines, was all fascintating stuff

Yeah, nothing like a state sponsord doping program.
The interview I read said they didnt use rare stuff, and not large doses. Mainly in the off season to hold off catabolic stress at most extreme training periods.
The Dr said they allways laughed at the Western theories of "secret" drugs and masking methods. They simply used it in
intense training. Or so he said.