This paper could further fuel the doping debate and whether athletes ought to be permanently banished from sport after a conviction:
http://jp.physoc.org/content/591/24/6221.abstract?etoc
.
This paper could further fuel the doping debate and whether athletes ought to be permanently banished from sport after a conviction:
http://jp.physoc.org/...4/6221.abstract?etoc
Very interesting. The study focuses on anabolic steroids, and I don’t think muscle mass increases of slowtwitch muscles are as important to endurance events as it would be for fast twitch dependent sports, but you do have to wonder about the long term benefits of other drugs, and how they may have enabled the “clean comebacks” (if we accept that at face value) of certain athletes.
But then again, I don’t have a background in physiology, so it would be interesting to hear the response of people with more experience. Just in case you don’t want to click on the link, the gist of it comes is summed up in this paragraph:
“When mice were briefly treated with steroids the muscle mass and number of nuclei increased. The drug was subsequently withdrawn for 3 months and the muscle mass returned to normal, but the excess cell nuclei persisted. When such muscles were subjected to overload they grew by 30% over 6 days while controls grew insignificantly. Our data suggest that previous strength training might be beneficial later in life, and that a brief exposure to anabolic steroids might have long lasting performance-enhancing effects.”
If I was a bike racer I would love to have an easily grow-able reserve of muscle nuclei on hand.
Yes, this study pertained specifically to anabolic steroids. However, the broader point, which gets me excited as an exercise biologist, is that cells, including muscle, have memory mechanisms. In addition to expanded pool of myonuclei, the DNA in each nucleus can be stably chemically modified in a way that results in altered gene expression (epigenetics).
Not only that, some germline epigenetic modifications can be heritable, which raises the spectre of one’s previously doping parents passing on memory of their superhuman training and performance…
In any case, I look forward to studies of whether muscle cells harbor permanent performance-enhancing adaptations in response to exogenous Epo exposure coupled with training and racing at otherwise unattainable levels…
Not only that, some germline epigenetic modifications can be heritable, which raises the spectre of one’s previously doping parents passing on memory of their superhuman training and performance…
Raises some interesting “sins of the father” ethical questions…
People keep forgetting that long term abuse damages natural production/receptors that – post usage for a long period (if not permanent) one’s testosterone levels will be half of what they produced naturally prior to usage. So if anything the most they can get back to is their natural level with this cellular memory research…
Citation needed.
My understanding is that immediately after a cycle of steroids your testosterone production will be ZERO point ZERO but that this returns to normal after just a few weeks.
People keep forgetting that long term abuse damages natural production/receptors that – post usage for a long period (if not permanent) one’s testosterone levels will be half of what they produced naturally prior to usage. So if anything the most they can get back to is their natural level with this cellular memory research…
that depends how long they were on and if they took anti estrogen medications.
that depends how long they were on and if they took anti estrogen medications.
This shows recovery of natural production just 30 days after injection without any anti estrogen medications:
This shows a number of ex steroid abusers 1 year after they quit using, all hormone levels within normal range:
While it may be possible that certain methods of abusing steroids can cause long term or permanent reduction in natural hormone production I haven’t seen evidence that it happens.
A couple of points about this:
-
“Female mice were treated with testosterone propionate for 14 days, inducing a 66% increase in the number of myonuclei and a 77% increase in fibre cross-sectional area. Three weeks after removing the drug, fibre size was decreased to the same level as in sham treated animals, but the number of nuclei remained elevated for at least 3 months (>10% of the mouse lifespan).”
If 3 months is >10% of lifespan, then 14 days translates to around 15 months in human terms, so when they say “mice were briefly treated with steroids” they mean the equivalent of a human taking testosterone for a straight 15 months. -
They tested on female mice, the effect may have been much less on male mice, due to the androgenizing effect of the testosterone.
http://www.clinchem.org/content/43/7/1262.full
“Special emphasis was placed on administering androgens to women and adolescent girls because this practice proved to be particularly effective for sports performance”
this. most people think when you lift weights and “build” muscle you’re adding muscle but really you’re only growing the cells you’ve already got.
Steroids add muscle cells, and for good apparently.
If I was a bike racer I would love to have an easily grow-able reserve of muscle nuclei on hand.
Point #1 - it doesn’t necessarily follow that the nucleation happens at some constant rate relative to total lifespan.
Only way to resolve this is test on humans. If I volunteer do I get a USAC and USAT exception? hehe
A couple of points about this:
-
“Female mice were treated with testosterone propionate for 14 days, inducing a 66% increase in the number of myonuclei and a 77% increase in fibre cross-sectional area. Three weeks after removing the drug, fibre size was decreased to the same level as in sham treated animals, but the number of nuclei remained elevated for at least 3 months (>10% of the mouse lifespan).”
If 3 months is >10% of lifespan, then 14 days translates to around 15 months in human terms, so when they say “mice were briefly treated with steroids” they mean the equivalent of a human taking testosterone for a straight 15 months. -
They tested on female mice, the effect may have been much less on male mice, due to the androgenizing effect of the testosterone.
http://www.clinchem.org/content/43/7/1262.full
“Special emphasis was placed on administering androgens to women and adolescent girls because this practice proved to be particularly effective for sports performance”