The Sandwich continues his interrogation of former steroid dealer Brian Batcheldor. TS: What type of designer drugs are today’s elite athletes doing to get an edge but beat the tests?
BB: Well, to tell you the truth, when you look at a lot of the countries in Eastern Europe and at China, while they might have governing bodies from various sports affiliated with the IOC, they don’t have the same regulations as other countries. For example, they’ll bring an athlete to world-class level over three or four years, and he’ll be taking steroids for all that time, but they’ll only enter him when he’s ready to go. It’s not rocket science. China has huge numbers of world-class athletes to draw on. It’s just a case of making sure of who’s totally clear before they go.
Outside of that, it’s still pretty much the traditional stuff: low doses of testosterone, growth hormone, EPO and all the other stuff that everyone reads about. There are a handful of designer compounds out there. Even with the new carbon test that the IOC is now using for testosterone, there are a couple of ways of getting around that on the horizon, and I know the Chinese have certainly been doing it.
TS: What are they doing?
BB: They’re using a testosterone that isn’t of vegetable origin.
TS: What do you think the U.S. Olympic athletes are up to? Do they have the same type of drug programs?
BB: It’s a case of being on the move all the time. You know, they’re always hopping around the world between different training camps’over here we call it ‘island hopping’where they go to some obscure location to train. The Canary Islands are a popular choice. They’ve got fantastic training facilities. There’s a large number of these islands, and it’s hard to keep tabs on people, so that’s where they do their ‘warm weather training’ and stuff like that. A lot of the top guys just keep on the move all the time and use small, regular amounts of testosterone with growth hormone. I mean, with most performance sports like track and field, they don’t need to use huge dosages of steroids. The nandrolone thing that you’re hearing about is mainly from the use of counterfeits. I mentioned [in Part 1] that Masteron was really nandrolone phenylpropionate. Well, Masteron was massively popular with the track and field athletes because of its fast clearance.
TS: The FDA is looking into the possibility that contaminated andro dietary supplements might be causing nandrolone positives, but you think it could be from counterfeits?
BB: Oh, yeah, I’ve no doubt that’s going on in the majority of cases. I know of several specific instances where it happened because athletes were using counterfeits. It never ceases to amaze me, the number of people out there who are still buying Masteron thinking that it’s real.
TS: Do you think the dietary supplement contamination thing might be a coverup?
BB: No, not totally. I believe it’s possible. And I can think of one or two companies that are unethical enough to allow that kind of contamination to occur. It’s possible to find a positive nandrolone test with a low level of contamination, provided the athlete took the supplement pretty close to when the test was taken. But he wouldn’t be hundreds of times over, like some individuals have been.
TS: What percentage of U.S. athletes are doping heavily in professional basketball, baseball, football and other sports?
BB: Much depends on what the sport is and the requirement of each individual position. It’s probably pretty similar to ours, if we’re looking at the power-orientated sports like football and rugby. Take a look at the size and physiques on the basketball players now. I would say that among those types of athletes, around 75 to 80 percent are using some kind of performance-enhancing drug.
TS: Have you ever dealt with Olympic athletes?
BB: Yes. In fact, I still advise a few.
TS: Back when the late Dan Duchaine was involved with Laboratories Milanos down in Mexico, a lot of the supplement company owners were or had been steroid dealers. Are some of the supplement companies fronts for steroid dealing?
BB: Not so much these days. I believe that even going back as little as, say, five or six years ago, there were a few companies that would fit that slot. One particular supplement company was very high profile yet was still actively involved in the steroid market.
Another funny thing is the way some of the guys who get busted for counterfeit operations go and start their own supplement companies several years later. And you’re supposed to believe that they’re suddenly Honest Joe. Hey, of course, they only put quality materials in their products.
TS: Have we discussed anything’or anyone’that might be harmful to our health when this interview is published?
BB: Nope, not to mine! I’d tell [whoever was concerned] that our conversation was supposed to be in confidence, but you betrayed that. With a name like The Sandwich, you’re gonna be pretty hard to track down, so I wouldn’t sweat it.
TS: Is the Russian mafia bringing in a lot of steroids along with the recreational drugs and firearms?
BB: That certainly isn’t a healthy topic.
TS: Are they pretty bad people to deal with?
BB: You know, if we’re talking about the real Russian mafia, you don’t want to mess with them. A couple of years after I stopped dealing with them, a contact I knew over here was late paying them, and they knew that I knew him. The Russians called me, I’d moved, but 24 hours later they just turned up on my doorstep because they knew I could find this guy. I had to phone around until I found someone who could buy the gear [Russian D-bol] off him so he’d have the money to pay them off. They weren’t going back without either killing him or getting the money.
TS: Will the real Russian mafia take over the organized crime we have here?
BB: No, I wouldn’t think so. There are several places in Europe where they’ve tried to take over organized crime, and it hasn’t worked. Their culture is just too different. The main reason they’ve been so successful where they are is because the country has always been full of deprivation. They were providing a service to the people, just like the Sicilian Mafia did during prohibition. In civilized countries it’s going to be very hard for them to take over.
TS: After you stopped dealing, you began working with elite athletes, is that correct?
BB: I think it was pretty much a natural progression. When I was originally getting good legitimate products, people wanted advice on how to use them and what’s the best way to cycle them and so on. It just escalated from there. Then it branched out from powerlifters and bodybuilders by word of mouth. Before I knew it, I had professional athletes coming to see me, wanting to know about beating the test and the best cycle to follow.
Eventually, it got to a point where I could actually make a living running a consultancy business, and that’s what I did.
TS: What are your theories on the cycling of steroids and other drugs? Of course, the most popular things nowadays are growth hormone, steroids and insulin.
BB: Again, with steroid cycles, it pretty much depends on what’s required by the individual. A lot of people just want to burn off bodyfat and stuff like that, but everyone wants a quick solution.
Pro bodybuilders are a different kettle of fish. They have a lot of pressure on them year-round. Irrespective of competition, they’re expected to be in good shape for seminars, guest posing and stuff like that. It makes it hard to stick to any long-term plan that you advocate because they might have to get in some sort of shape for a guest spot at a moment’s notice. If the conditions are ideal, for a competitive athlete, I think it’s best to follow a series of short cycles year-round. Obviously, more regard is paid to a precontest cycle and more time would be allowed for that. If an athlete is competing several times a year, then it’s necessary to follow a continuous series of short cycles year-round.
TS: What about the recreational bodybuilder who doesn’t want to compete, which probably describes most people who read this?
BB: They’re the vast majority of users. Most of them will never compete, even though they come to you saying that they plan to do so. With those guys I ask them to consider everything they’re really expecting from their training. Many of them don’t want to compete at the top level, or they just want to have a respectable physique. My advice to most of them is, you don’t really need to take steroids for that. If you’re looking at getting the maximum gains from the amount of time you’re investing in the gym’and you believe that steroids are an option and have no specific health concerns’then they can be used safely.
I’d advocate a series of short cycles on and off throughout the year. The long cycles that a lot of people follow are doing more harm. They believe that a couple of 12-to-16-week cycles once or twice a year is a lot safer. They’re misleading themselves. It’s quite simply not the case.
TS: Why is that?
BB: Two common cycles are four weeks on/two off and three on/one off. There are theories behind them, and it basically boils down to considering the suppression of the endogenous [natural] production of hormones. That occurs pretty quickly’two to three weeks at best. A lot of athletes prefer to follow short cycles to try and avoid that. Realistically, if they’re not giving it some proper thought, endogenous suppression is inevitable. It doesn’t take the body long to catch up with what’s going on. The cycles I design use a mixture of cutting-edge things that most people aren’t aware of to try and avoid that.
TS: Could you share with us some of those cutting-edge techniques?
BB: Yes. The cycles I use with many recreational bodybuilders are like the following: They’ll do three weeks on, and a typical starting dosage would be around one milligram per kilogram of lean body weight per day, with 70-to-30 percent anabolic-to-androgenic ratio. If we took a hundred-kilo guy [220 pounds] with 12 percent bodyfat, then that would be like 76 kilos, coming out to roughly 76 milligrams per day.
TS: That’s less than a gram a week of steroids.
BB: Yeah, it would do. I’m talking here as a starting point, and obviously, the recommendation will vary depending on whether the people have taken steroids before or what they’re looking for.
Where it gets a little bit more complicated is when you take the specific ratios into account for each individual drug. That’s a loose calculation. What I don’t do is say, ‘Testosterone is androgenic, so that’s part of the 30 percent, and Deca is anabolic, and, therefore, that’s gonna be part of the 70 percent.’ Each hormone has its own percentages of anabolic and androgenic properties to offer up to the equation.
Next, we have to calculate the clearance rates for each drug. Each depot injectable release, say, X amount per day, and any deficit from that ideal dosage will be made up with orals. Typically, after the depot preparations have been calculated, you’ll see a descending dosage pattern of orals. That’s because of the pharmacokinetics of the injectables’their levels constantly build up at the beginning due to the overlap effect. Normally, there will be a tapering off with faster-acting steroids like testosterone propionate, for example.
To avoid endogenous shutdown, I sometimes use a depot gonadorelin analogue at the start of the cycle. My preferred product is buserelin. In the States, you don’t have this product, but you do have leuprorelin, and it will probably do the same job. Basically, those products blunt the impact of steroids on endogenous production.
Another injectable I also use sometimes is formestane, which is a potent anti-aromatase with mild anabolic properties. It comes as a 250-milligram injection. That lasts for about three or four weeks. Then after the three weeks you take a week off, and during that period you take three shots of HCG. At the end of that fourth week most suppression will have been avoided or corrected.
The following two weeks I combine nonaromatizing highly anabolic injectable products like Primobolan Depot and Winstrol with nonaromatizing androgens like trenbolone. When you use that kind of androgen, there would be a slight drop in dosage, as they’re very highly antigonadotrophic, even though they don’t convert to estrogen. Where they’re not involved, I’ll usually use testosterone undecanoate (Andriol), because if you take them spaced out throughout the day, they clear too fast really to upset natural production at sensible dosages. Even though a capsule is 40 milligrams, it releases very little testosterone into the system.
Once again, the depot preparations like Primobolan are all taken on the front end of the two weeks to facilitate clearance, because that’s quite an important thing: When you’re off, you have to be off. You can’t have the metabolites from the last drug lingering around for ages, because all of that has got to do with the suppression side of things. Proviron is also used because of its high binding to sex-hormone-binding globulin. Thus, it makes a product more bio-available. And after that two weeks they’ll take three weeks off, during which time they’ll use injectable ATP, insulin and possibly a low dosage of GH as well. I’ve used that type of three-weeks-on/one-off, two-on/three-off cycle for the last couple of years with quite a few athletes very, very successfully. They suffered minimal endogenous suppression and fast rebound, and it’s worked very well. I’ve had immense feedback. Even some pro bodybuilders are using that system.
TS: What are your thoughts on the recent trend for cycling two weeks on, two weeks off, starting with a high dose of like a gram a week, tapering down a little bit and then just going off completely with some orals?
BB: I’ve experimented with those sort of short dosage cycles as well, and there are specific situations where they do work very well, particularly in tested athletes. A common fallacy is that using high dosages of fast-acting compounds for short periods of time will get around endogenous suppression and allow you to bounce back quickly. It’s not the case. I mean, literally, if you start on testosterone propionate, for example, you’ll shut down your own testosterone much quicker than if you use testosterone cypionate. It will actually take longer to bounce back as well. I do a lot of blood work on my tested athletes. In every single case where they’ve used high amounts of propionate, it has shut endogenous production off for a lot longer than if they’d stuck with something like cypionate.
TS: What are your thoughts on the old-fashioned cycle theories such as the diamond cycle, where you start low, and around midpoint you go high, and then you drop back down to finish?
BB: To tell you the truth, I don’t really feel there are any advantages to tapering. It doesn’t really seem to make much sense. I’ve never seen any analytical evidence that it actually brings back endogenous production or avoids suppression any better than just staying on the straight dosage. I think the better way of doing it is just a short cycle and then go off.
TS: I’m going to ask you your opinions about certain drugs that are used today. Arimidex?
BB: I think it’s quite an effective anti-aromatase. All the people I’ve got using it have had very good results with it. Some of them have felt, for some reason, pretty sick on the milligram per day, and they’ve switched to a milligram every other day and still gotten pretty good results. TS: What about insulin use? Do you prefer Humalin R or the fast-acting synthetic, Humalog?
BB: I prefer Humalog. I find it more manageable, far more predictable. It’s just generally a much safer product and much more effective at lower dosages than Humalin.
TS: What type of dosages do you recommend for Humalog?
BB: Again, much depends on the individual. Generally, I think four to six I.U.s a couple of times a day is fine. With strength athletes I use it as an anticatabolic the last few weeks before a big competition. They’ll take it postworkout, and they’ll take it first thing the next morning purely for its anticatabolic properties. It’s very good at suppressing cortisol.
TS: Do you think insulin is the future of bodybuilding?
BB: If used correctly, it’s highly effective, but I think it’s been overplayed. If you use it wrong, you just get fat in the end.
Bodybuilders have a lot more trouble getting into shape because of insulin. I’ve witnessed that many times. It’s lipogenic’it increases the size of fat cells’and a lot of guys aren’t realizing that and are staying on far too long.
TS: Some people say growth hormone doesn’t work at all; some people rave about it. Where do you stand?
BB: [Chuckles] I can’t see how anyone could use growth hormone and claim that it doesn’t work. I’ve seen phenomenal gains with certain individuals with growth hormone. There’s no doubt in my mind, and any real expert out there would have to say the same. If you’ve got any practical experience with people, there should be no element of doubt that growth hormone works. With some people it’s been the catalyst they needed to step up to being a competitive athlete.
TS: Are people not using enough?
BB: Yeah, that’s possible. I hear some people are doing very low dosages. They work it out in their budget, and they say, Well, I can only afford to use this, so this is what I’ll use. If you were using four I.U.s a day and now you’re using two a day and you get nothing, it’s not cost effective. I’ve had experiences with people who didn’t gain much after using very low amounts.
TS: What’s your recommended minimum dose of growth hormone? And do you have a favorite brand?
BB: Four I.U.s a day, in conjunction with steroids. In some of the protocols I’ve advocated, where an athlete has come off of steroids and he’s using insulin and stuff like that, I sometimes have him use GH on top. Even if it’s a very low dosage, it still helps maintain an anabolic environment in the body as the androgens are decreasing.
As for a favorite brand, no, not really. I get e-mails all the time from people saying they use this product and they didn’t gain much, and this other product was brilliant. And there’s loads of different theories about why. Most of the experts in the drug companies say that the theories about antibodies deactivating GH are invalid because they know that these antibodies are inert.
TS: Is it possible that some athletes may have developed Creutzfeldt-Jacob disease, otherwise known as mad-cow disease, from biologically active cadaver hGH that was available in the ’80s?
BB: I’ve never come across this. I can remember bodybuilders in the early ’80s using Crescormon, which was the nonrecombinant form by KabiVitrum. I guess maybe the percentage of people using it among the bodybuilding fraternity was way too low to yield any statistics yet, who knows? I’ve come across some weirder practices. A couple of years ago a few of the pros were using porcine [pig] growth hormone. It was from nonrecombinant sources as well. The stuff I saw was from Sigma Chemicals, so it was definitely nonrecombinant. The athletes were quite honest about it: ‘No, it’s good, you know. We’re getting gains off it. Not as much as regular growth hormone, but we’re getting gains.’ But they just didn’t seem to, ah, realize the risk.
I’m talking about guys who placed in the top five in the Olympia in the last few years.
TS: Dennis Newman’s leukemia was allegedly exacerbated by growth hormone use. Do you think something along those lines may happen to those individuals in the future?
BB: I think it’s quite possible. Growth hormone was the catalyst, if you like. The disease was there; it was just a matter of time, you know. I don’t believe that it potentiates leukemia. When you talk about the nonmedical use of growth hormone, it’s still far too early to tell yet. I just can’t see many companies putting the money into that research, to tell you the truth, because it’s one of those things that no one wants to know.
TS: What are your thoughts on the very popular underground prostaglandin PGF2a?
BB: My experience with the prostaglandins is negative. The pros with whom I’ve discussed it found nothing but swelling and plenty of pain from it but no actual tissue growth. It’s not the cult drug that others say it is.
TS: Speaking of site injections, synthol is catching on like wildfire!
BB: [Sighs] I don’t think it’s a very safe practice. I mean, the thought of injecting a nonsterile solution into your muscle horrifies me, but it seems that more and more people are willing to do it.
Some of the more popular brands of it are just MCT oil. There’s a guy who makes it over here for another well-known writer, so to speak. Most of it is totally unsterile. Sure, there’s some degree of permanent effect achieved, but most of it comes from scar tissue, and it leaves the user wide open to serious muscle tears a bit further down the line. In fact, I get e-mails almost weekly concerning that, where people have had biceps ruptures and triceps detachments and stuff like that. The most common results are that cysts or whole chunks of muscle have to be removed because of it.
TS: So are guys who are using huge amounts of synthol in danger of ending up in dire straits a few years from now?
BB: I think we’re going to start seeing some serious casualties from it. When you think of those huge volumes of oil’hundreds of milliliters that just sit there after being injected over a course of time’there’s got to be some payback somewhere down the line.
TS: Have you seen the recent MuscleMag interview with that bodybuilder in New York who has those 24-or so-inch arms and looks really ridiculous? He says he doesn’t use synthol but repeated localized injections of things like testosterone propionate. He claims that causes fascia stretching, but it doesn’t look like actual muscle’it’s lumpy and asymmetrical.
BB: He has loads of scar tissue. The use of localized injections of anabolics is pretty popular at the moment. It has been for a couple of years, and it does achieve some degree of localized muscle growth. For example, instead of taking two 200-milligram shots of Deca, you make the dosage up with four 50-milligram ampules. A lot of bodybuilders are doing that, certainly over here. On average, they’re doing it one week in every month. Localized injections of testosterone give a localized IGF response, so that’s another mechanism by which it works.
TS: Speaking of IGF-1, what are your thoughts on that near-mythical drug?
BB: I think there’s some degree of efficacy to it. I’ve seen it. I think most bodybuilders will never get to use an ideal dosage because of the cost. I personally feel that an ideal dosage may be in the milligrams-per-day range, as opposed to micrograms per day. A lot of research has been done with children with dosages from three to nine milligrams per day, so it must be safe if they can do that with kids, you know? Bodybuilders have used it experimentally with 50 to 200 micrograms per day, but some are getting noticeable results. I believe there’s some potential for it if someone offers it at a more affordable price.
TS: At last year’s Mr. Olympia some of the guys were bigger, but they were bloated and not really tight. If you looked at them from the front, they were watery and soft; if you look at them from the back, they were shredded beyond belief. What was going on there?
BB: Certain guys up there use a lot of localized injections, so, even when they got the fluid-management things under control, they were still holding water locally because of the localized injections. Things like synthol cause fluid to be retained in certain areas. Also, those localized-site-enhancement agents cause massive elevations in cortisol.
I can see what’s behind the diuretic test. It made sense to do that. Ironically, although it was put there to protect the competitors, it has ended up encouraging an even more dangerous practice. A lot of those guys will always find a way of screwing themselves up no matter what you put in to protect them. One or two of them are suffering from serious kidney conditions due to diuretics.
TS: Were they using a lot of diuretics a couple of weeks out and getting off in time to beat the test, or was it the plasma expanders that were enabling them to get in great condition?
BB: You know, you never get the full story from them anyway. The plasma expanders, if they’re used safely and sensibly, can work very well. It’s just a question of whether they’re using them sensibly. If you stay dehydrated for too long after using them, then problems can occur. TS: The top bodybuilders are getting bigger every year. What type of dosages are they using?
BB: In the last couple of years, if you look at the Olympia, the condition of the top guys has generally suffered, really. I think the guys aren’t as sharp as they were a couple of years ago. I think that when Ronnie Coleman first won and in the year before that, the condition that was required [to be competitive] was a lot harder.
As for dosages, there are a few guys in the Olympia lineup who admitted to using off-season cycles that revolve around 4,000 milligrams a week of testosterone, 2,000 milligrams a week of Deca and 40 to 50 Dianabol a day.
TS: What type of really radical things have you seen some of the top bodybuilders do?
BB: Well, to me the worst addition to this game over the past few years has been Nubain. It’s one product I’ve never gotten involved in or would never supply, even when I was dealing. I don’t believe in it, and I’ve encountered many, many people who’ve had very, very serious problems with it’many who still are having them.
TS: And that includes some of the top bodybuilders we see in the magazines?
BB: Yeah, counting those.
TS: I hear quite a few of them are using ecstasy too.
BB: Yeah, they are. It’s amazing. There are some futile arguments they come up with in defense of those sort of things. They have anticatabolic properties or some rubbish like that. There’s no place for those things for any competitive athlete.
Guys have also found Valium. They’re using that as well and getting hooked on it. I’d say, it’s because of all the fat burners. You know, the thyroid preparations and stuff like that. It makes ’em a little bit hyper, and then they end up using Valium to get to sleep.
Xanax is pretty highly anti-catabolic, and I’ve advocated that for a few athletes to use at target times for lowering cortisol, but not as a general practice.
TS: What do you think of DNP?
BB: I’ve known a couple of people who ended up in hospital on that. I think it’s very, very dangerous. I think its long-term safety is very, very questionable, and it’s not something I recommend to anyone. I’ve known a few Olympia competitors who’ve used it and then never gone back to it again.
TS: What are your thoughts on the future of pro bodybuilding?
BB: I don’t think we’re going to see an escalation in steroid dosages. Probably any real breakthroughs are going to come in peptide hormone technology, maybe like IGF-1, if the price drops dramatically on that, or things like recombinant fibroblast growth factor (FGF). That looks very promising in regards to localized muscle growth.
TS: Do pro bodybuilders care about their health?
BB: No, I don’t think it’s a major consideration. A lot of them are pretty screwed up, probably through the use of things like Nubain. They probably feel that they’re doing fine because they look great.
TS: Is it true that a lot of the pros have drugged-out orgies at bodybuilding events and screw all type of girls’and men?
BB: I don’t know if it’s true, but I hear the same rumors as everybody else. You hear about some of the pros risking suspension through some of their illicit behavior outside of bodybuilding, particularly with the gay Web sites and stuff like that.
TS: You knew Dan Duchaine. What can you tell us about him?
BB: I spoke with Dan on several occasions, both in the early days and in more recent times. Dan was like a one-man company. He deserved the reputation he got. He was the bloke who paved the way for the rest of us. He was the first guy to gain notoriety from what he did. Dan could blow hot and cold, and I know a lot of people who didn’t get along with him, but I was fond of him. He was always polite to me, and shortly after his release from prison the last time I was bringing him over here to do some seminars.
I found him to be a highly knowledgeable individual. He had no academic background, and yet he proved just how specific a science this is and how much of it can be self-taught from experience.
He’s one of the individuals I respect most, along with Tony Fitton. Fitton was’and still is’a very knowledgeable individual. I’m still in regular contact with Tony. He’s got that mix of knowledge and experience, the same as Dan had. I’ve got a lot of respect for Bill Roberts. He’s a very knowledgeable guy with some very valuable input on the biochemical side of things. I still speak with him occasionally. Jim Wright, who works for Weider, is a good friend and a very knowledgeable person. His book, Anabolic Steroids and Sports, to me is still one of the best books on the subject.
TS: What are your thoughts on Michael Mooney?
BB: I’ve got a lot of respect for Michael Mooney. I went through a little bit of a personal tragedy last year, and it made me reappraise the situation with regards to what the medical world has to offer. You come to realize that there’s a lot of things from the dark medicine we’re involved in that could benefit people in other areas, people with terminal illnesses, for example. I take my hat off to people like Mike Mooney, who’s gone out of his way to prove it.
TS: What are your current thoughts on nutrition? I know you’ve designed quite a few supplements that are commonly used today.
BB: I think we’ve made bigger breakthroughs in the past two or three years than have been made in the past 20 years. To me, an unfortunate thing that’s come out of steroid overexposure is that people are becoming more skeptical about supplements. Many believe that they should stop wasting their time and get straight on the gear. I actually sort of miss those early years, you know the years of naivet’, when you believed that swallowing 200 desiccated liver tablets would be of some benefit. Today, we’ve got better products out there than ever, but people are still very skeptical, and I think that’s a shame. Drugs alone are not the answer.
TS: How do you feel about the cutting-edge diet philosophies?
BB: Well, again, one thing that isn’t addressed by many so-called gurus is the synergism between training, diet and drugs. No one takes into account that these things work hand in hand. So someone comes out with a training protocol and doesn’t make any allowance for those who are taking drugs and those who are clean.
The same thing goes with nutrition. The extremely high-protein diets that are advocated by most of the pros would be of no use to a clean athlete.
I’m a big believer in high-protein intakes when training volumes are high, and I’m speaking now as a strength coach. For the steroid cycle that I described’the three weeks on/one week off and two on/three off’the protein requirements change throughout the cycle. For example, the protein levels are reduced when the athletes are off steroids, because they can’t synthesize as much protein. I have some ideas