Understanding Anabolic/androgenic ratios

lemmingdive1

New member
Awards
0
Okay I thought this was a worthwhile topic to bring up because I'm a bit confused, and it seems others are too. My understanding is that the ana:andro ratio is just that; a ratio that gives you an idea of how much anabolic activity there is in a compound RELATIVE to its androgenic activity. I've noticed many interpret the ratio differently, as a sort of absolute effectiveness ranking. For example take epistane (960:something I forgot) or msten (660:170), these compounds have high anabolic activity relative to their androgenic activity. However, just because their ratios are high, this doesn't translate into being [insert number] times as anabolic as testoterone. This just means that test has a lot of androgenic activity compared to its anabolic activity (1:1), with no way to tell something's absolute effectiveness/anabolic power just by looking at the ratio.

Do I have the correct understanding? I think I do but I really wanna clear this up because some take it as a ratio of effects as I do, while others see it as a rating for the overall strength of a compound.
 
EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
There is no understanding them is the reality of it. the problem is these are in vitro - in a petri dish - not in a human.

But no, as far as the numbers go those ratios are to testosterone if I recall right but i'm not sure what the baseline for testosterone is. Taking that ratio for msten, it would be reported as 66:17 if it was an absolute ratio just of itself. so the fact that its got the 0 at the end means its also relative to something else, probably test.
 
Royd The Noyd

Royd The Noyd

Board Sponsor
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
There is no understanding them is the reality of it. the problem is these are in vitro - in a petri dish - not in a human.

But no, as far as the numbers go those ratios are to testosterone if I recall right but i'm not sure what the baseline for testosterone is. Taking that ratio for msten, it would be reported as 66:17 if it was an absolute ratio just of itself. so the fact that its got the 0 at the end means its also relative to something else, probably test.
Dude your getting so old your brain is failing you. :D

Anabolic:Andro ratios come from in vivo data in rats (via hershberger assay). The ratio can be constructed from different variables (vs. Testosterone or any other steroid, route if administration, etc).
 
EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Dude your getting so old your brain is failing you. :D

Anabolic:Andro ratios come from in vivo data in rats (via hershberger assay). The ratio can be constructed from different variables (vs. Testosterone or any other steroid, route if administration, etc).
ah well, you remember some, you forget some. that's right too, different books or ratio sources (I think even some individual pages in books) compare vs different baselines. but either way, the relatively anabolicness / androgenicness in rats doesn't apply 1:1 to humans so there still is no real understanding them, at least not in terms of being able to talk about strength gains vs mass gains.
 
heckler7

heckler7

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
its arbitrary, everyone is different. its like saying looking at the alcohol percent will tell you how much more drunk you will get compared to others. genetics is the key factor
 
pizzadrol

pizzadrol

Member
Awards
0
its arbitrary, everyone is different. its like saying looking at the alcohol percent will tell you how much more drunk you will get compared to others. genetics is the key factor
But what's the anabolic:androgenic ratio of alcohol? I hear it stacks really well with methyls for ultimate gainz




Don't worry guys I'm kidding.
 

Similar threads


Top