[quote]Cortes wrote:
HKDOOM wrote:
Those poundages you mentioned (600/350/600) sound pretty high to me considering how weak most of your average trainers are (and
Except for possibly the bench, those numbers sound far too high for most of the average population to worry about achieving naturally as a standard to hit before beginning AAS. Especially if one is a bodybuilder and doesn’t give nearly as much of a shit about his lift numbers.[/quote]
I dare anyone to go and look at the old standards of lifting before 1950’s and you will see the dramatic increase in strenght correlated to bodyweight.
That said, in my university a couple of years ago they did an analysis of sumo wrestlers and other strenght athletes. They found out that all things equal (height, limbs, diet) the sumo wrestlers where carrying the most muscle mass. They where also carrying the most bodyfat.
I don’t know if this hasn’t been told before, but there is a natural limit as to how much muscle you can have while carrying a certain level of bodyfat. Most people are intrinsically aware of this as most vets know that the muscular gains become harder and harder while the fat gain seems easier. Why??
I don’t mean to be rude, but anyone that hasn’t taken steroids can say that they just speed up the rate that would happen normally. Sorry but that is just marketing propaganda that some personal trainers have used to get money.
I don’t mean to be rude, but anyone that hasn’t taken steroids can say that they just speed up the rate that would happen normally. Sorry but that is just marketing propaganda that some personal trainers have used to get money.[/quote]
[quote]Cortes wrote:
HKDOOM wrote:
Those poundages you mentioned (600/350/600) sound pretty high to me considering how weak most of your average trainers are (and
Except for possibly the bench, those numbers sound far too high for most of the average population to worry about achieving naturally as a standard to hit before beginning AAS. Especially if one is a bodybuilder and doesn’t give nearly as much of a shit about his lift numbers.[/quote]
Yeah true, but I’m not a bb’er. I’d hazard a guess that a guy should be around 225 before AAS if he’s around 6 foot. I dunno, that’s just a WAG.
I don’t mean to be rude, but anyone that hasn’t taken steroids can say that they just speed up the rate that would happen normally. Sorry but that is just marketing propaganda that some personal trainers have used to get money.
I totally agree with this.
[/quote]
I’m sorry did you say can or canNOT say that?
And what then would you say they do?
Besides, I’m not suggesting that you can’t go past your natural threshold with AAS, merely that the question posed asked specifically about people who were NOT way past the natural threshold. In the process of getting TO your natural limit, AAS speed up your rate of progress beyond normal speed, no? You could take 20 years or you could take 12 to get there.
How can anyone asses their natural limit? When do you know that you have reached it? Is there any test (blood, urine, etc) that can be done to prove that this is the limit of YOUR genetics.
As of today scientists are unsure of how AAS works. They have theorized that what AAS does primarily is to speed the rate of protein synthesis. Faster synthesis, better recuperation, better recuperation from training, more muscle created, and all that muscle utilizes more calories from your food leaving less to be transformed into fat.
My whole gripe with the “steroids only make you gain faster than what you would normally do” is that if anyone thinks that they will make in 20 years what someone using steroids does in 12 is being fooled by someone. That is like telling an 18 year old kid that if he sleeps properly, trains hard, eats right and takes all the best years of his life at 38 when his testosterone naturally will decrease he will look just like someone who took exogenous test but that person reached that level at 30. Does anyone else but me sees the error in this type of logic?
I will repeat this again:
You can be naturally big
You can be naturally ripped
You can NOT be big, ripped and natural
But then again my definition of big and ripped may be completely different than yours.
I don’t mean to be rude, but anyone that hasn’t taken steroids can say that they just speed up the rate that would happen normally. Sorry but that is just marketing propaganda that some personal trainers have used to get money.
I totally agree with this.
[/quote]
its more of an exaggeration that you CAN achieve a strong good physique without steroids. But yes of course steroids will put you at a much higher area and speed you towards your goals.-and beyond for some-
also for the #'s thing its a bit high and seems that most users that start are around 300ish bench 400-500ish dl and squat. Basically you just want to make sure you have some solid training behind you, so that you will be able to be smart with your use.
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
Evil Dude625 wrote:
With all the bad side effects to steroids are they really worth taking? Especially when they do nothing else except hurt you and grow muscle.
Kid, don’t be an idiot. You’re all of 13 years old and you’re talking down to people with master’s degrees in biochemistry–the field of study that looks directly at things like hormones (steroids), enzymes, and other biological mechanisms. For your information, there are also a couple doctors around here, and many more aspiring doctors. You don’t know dick compared to them, and neither does the media, or most members of congress.
Don’t believe everything you see on the news. The media has a way of getting everything wrong and back-asswards, especially when they’re biased against something or trying to make a splash.
Now, if you’re nice, maybe you can learn something on this site. Try not to sound like you think you know everything.[/quote]
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
Cortes wrote:
HKDOOM wrote:
Those poundages you mentioned (600/350/600) sound pretty high to me considering how weak most of your average trainers are (and
Except for possibly the bench, those numbers sound far too high for most of the average population to worry about achieving naturally as a standard to hit before beginning AAS. Especially if one is a bodybuilder and doesn’t give nearly as much of a shit about his lift numbers.
Yeah true, but I’m not a bb’er. I’d hazard a guess that a guy should be around 225 before AAS if he’s around 6 foot. I dunno, that’s just a WAG. [/quote]
I reached a natural maximum of 205 at 5’11" and that was too much fat for me. I am not a sloppy bulker, I’m not a powerlifter, I am a vain son of a bitch and I am not ashamed to say that I lift to look good. For myself and for the ladies. There are those of us out there who do not have the genetics to get to 225 ripped naturally, slowly or quickly. Again, I think your standards, as far as the general population is concerned, are way too high.
Personally, I would say that average trainer should have at least 5 years of smart training and 200lbs (at an acceptable bodyfat) if he is around 6’. There will be exceptions to this, as well. But generally, if someone has stuck with it for that long and is around that size, they’re probably good to go.
[quote]pickapeck wrote:
Aragorn wrote:
Evil Dude625 wrote:
With all the bad side effects to steroids are they really worth taking? Especially when they do nothing else except hurt you and grow muscle.
Kid, don’t be an idiot. You’re all of 13 years old and you’re talking down to people with master’s degrees in biochemistry–the field of study that looks directly at things like hormones (steroids), enzymes, and other biological mechanisms. For your information, there are also a couple doctors around here, and many more aspiring doctors. You don’t know dick compared to them, and neither does the media, or most members of congress.
Don’t believe everything you see on the news. The media has a way of getting everything wrong and back-asswards, especially when they’re biased against something or trying to make a splash.
Now, if you’re nice, maybe you can learn something on this site. Try not to sound like you think you know everything.
absolutely spot on.[/quote]
Spot on? Oh yeah, I bet this site is filled with members with master degrees in biochemistry. 99 percent of the people on this site are one of the following: Liars, morons,know it alls. Very few educated beyond highschool.
[quote]BIGERIC wrote:
pickapeck wrote:
Aragorn wrote:
Evil Dude625 wrote:
With all the bad side effects to steroids are they really worth taking? Especially when they do nothing else except hurt you and grow muscle.
Kid, don’t be an idiot. You’re all of 13 years old and you’re talking down to people with master’s degrees in biochemistry–the field of study that looks directly at things like hormones (steroids), enzymes, and other biological mechanisms. For your information, there are also a couple doctors around here, and many more aspiring doctors. You don’t know dick compared to them, and neither does the media, or most members of congress.
Don’t believe everything you see on the news. The media has a way of getting everything wrong and back-asswards, especially when they’re biased against something or trying to make a splash.
Now, if you’re nice, maybe you can learn something on this site. Try not to sound like you think you know everything.
absolutely spot on.
Spot on? Oh yeah, I bet this site is filled with members with master degrees in biochemistry. 99 percent of the people on this site are one of the following: Liars, morons,know it alls. Very few educated beyond highschool.
[/quote]
hahahahaha
back to the real topic …anymore more pics of this cute little asian girl?
