Taureau
Administrator
In the real world, or at least as real as it gets in the gym, bodybuilders and lifters have long been aware that some people explode on fairly moderate anabolic steroid dosages, while others struggle to justify the risks for the returns they receive. Some of the variation is obviously due to work ethic, equipment, lifestyle, etc. However, one underlying factor determines maximal athletic performance, as well as the degree of benefit and exposure to risks associated with anabolic-androgenic steroids (AAS) use— genetics.
Charles Darwin is credited with recognizing that individuals within a species do not all thrive equally; some struggle and die, while others prosper and propagate by mating with selective members of the opposite gender. The crux of his theories is commonly referred to as ‘survival of the fittest’ or natural selection. Sadly, Darwin’s theories dominated the interest of biologists for decades, overshadowing the contributions of Gregor Mendel— whose experiments with peas led to the understanding of genes and genetic transfer. This was in 1865, nearly 100 years before Watson and Crick were credited with discovering DNA.
Genes are inherited from one’s biological parents, and contain the code for assembling the individual. Most genes are identical among people, even among primates in general (chimps, apes, etc). However, there are obviously clusters of people who have certain physical traits (the expression of these genes), and individuals who have nearly unique conditions. Most mutations (genetic changes) do not benefit humans— after all, we are the result of centuries or eons of natural selection. Those that remain in the gene pool are changes that alter traits by a matter of degrees: eye color, straight hair versus curly, enyzme activity, hormone action, etc.
The actions of testosterone are dependent upon the individual’s ability to produce the hormone, maintain a relatively steady concentration over time, tissue-specific recognition and stimulation, G-protein coupling, co-activator and co-suppressor activity, response elements within the chromosomes, transcriptional and translational events, and so on. The advances in science over the last few decades, particularly at the genetic and molecular level, have expanded the knowledge base to such breadth and depth that it is nearly impossible to be expert in all matters relating to androgen actions in humans.
Most experts in biosciences are forced to narrow their focus if they wish to advance understanding or be responsible for innovation or discovery. The days of the generalist have faded since the Renaissance, when a man could be a physician, mathematician, astronomer, physicist and barber— as long as he was cool with the church and had a steady supply of leeches.
The burden to modern-day researchers is picking through the vast and growing databases, selecting out the studies and reviews that expose a previously-unknown concept, explain the practical use of what is known, or connect-the-dots in understanding the relationship between seemingly unrelated findings or ideas.
There is a genetic trait that directly affects one component of the androgen response (such as building muscle). This trait affects the sensitivity of the androgen receptor, a vital piece in the anabolic pathway. The androgen receptor has a few regions in its molecular form where changes in the amino acid sequence (all proteins are chains of amino acids; the shape and function of the protein is determined by the sequence) can affect the sensitivity of the receptor for attaching to testosterone or other androgens, attaching to the chromosomes (DNA)— or relaying the receptor-stimulated gene messages to the rest of the cell (an event called ‘transcription’).
Androgen receptor sensitivity is actually pretty variable among men— some respond vigorously to testosterone, while others do not respond at all. There are a number of genetic males who develop as women, due to androgen receptor insensitivity. These women are unaware they are genetically male, unless a chromosome analysis is performed, usually as part of an infertility exam. This condition deserves a great deal of empathy, as these individuals are often married and seeking to begin a family when they discover they are 46XY— genetically male.
Charles Darwin is credited with recognizing that individuals within a species do not all thrive equally; some struggle and die, while others prosper and propagate by mating with selective members of the opposite gender. The crux of his theories is commonly referred to as ‘survival of the fittest’ or natural selection. Sadly, Darwin’s theories dominated the interest of biologists for decades, overshadowing the contributions of Gregor Mendel— whose experiments with peas led to the understanding of genes and genetic transfer. This was in 1865, nearly 100 years before Watson and Crick were credited with discovering DNA.
Genes are inherited from one’s biological parents, and contain the code for assembling the individual. Most genes are identical among people, even among primates in general (chimps, apes, etc). However, there are obviously clusters of people who have certain physical traits (the expression of these genes), and individuals who have nearly unique conditions. Most mutations (genetic changes) do not benefit humans— after all, we are the result of centuries or eons of natural selection. Those that remain in the gene pool are changes that alter traits by a matter of degrees: eye color, straight hair versus curly, enyzme activity, hormone action, etc.
The actions of testosterone are dependent upon the individual’s ability to produce the hormone, maintain a relatively steady concentration over time, tissue-specific recognition and stimulation, G-protein coupling, co-activator and co-suppressor activity, response elements within the chromosomes, transcriptional and translational events, and so on. The advances in science over the last few decades, particularly at the genetic and molecular level, have expanded the knowledge base to such breadth and depth that it is nearly impossible to be expert in all matters relating to androgen actions in humans.
Most experts in biosciences are forced to narrow their focus if they wish to advance understanding or be responsible for innovation or discovery. The days of the generalist have faded since the Renaissance, when a man could be a physician, mathematician, astronomer, physicist and barber— as long as he was cool with the church and had a steady supply of leeches.
The burden to modern-day researchers is picking through the vast and growing databases, selecting out the studies and reviews that expose a previously-unknown concept, explain the practical use of what is known, or connect-the-dots in understanding the relationship between seemingly unrelated findings or ideas.
There is a genetic trait that directly affects one component of the androgen response (such as building muscle). This trait affects the sensitivity of the androgen receptor, a vital piece in the anabolic pathway. The androgen receptor has a few regions in its molecular form where changes in the amino acid sequence (all proteins are chains of amino acids; the shape and function of the protein is determined by the sequence) can affect the sensitivity of the receptor for attaching to testosterone or other androgens, attaching to the chromosomes (DNA)— or relaying the receptor-stimulated gene messages to the rest of the cell (an event called ‘transcription’).
Androgen receptor sensitivity is actually pretty variable among men— some respond vigorously to testosterone, while others do not respond at all. There are a number of genetic males who develop as women, due to androgen receptor insensitivity. These women are unaware they are genetically male, unless a chromosome analysis is performed, usually as part of an infertility exam. This condition deserves a great deal of empathy, as these individuals are often married and seeking to begin a family when they discover they are 46XY— genetically male.