[quote]vicktimised wrote:
Yea it was designed for females, but its being experimented on males with pubertal gyno and showing reduction in size. Go talk to an endocronologist about it[/quote]
Is this your thread?:
http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=1276161&pageNo=0#1276161
Why are you giving advice?
the program says do it for 1-3 weeks. what do i do after 3 weeks? find a new program and switch between the 2 every 3 weeks?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
kroby wrote:
Holy crap. Your problem is you listen to dumb asses.
Considering most of the people here simply parrot(poorly) what they read either here or somewhere else, are you surprised? I doubt most of the advice doled out on this site in the forums is coming from people who even look like they’ve seen a gym regularly.
Those who have been around a while know who the idiots are. I would imagine quite a few are simply logging in and believing whoever types a response first…even though that person is probably 15 years old and doesn’t even have gym access.
To the OP, you are skinny as fuck. Your doctor was right. First, everyone isn’t made exactly the same. What you are seeing will no doubt be corrected for the most part when you actually build some decent muscle on your chest.
Right now, the only thing giving your chest shape at all is your rib cage and the gland right under your nipples. When it is cold or even when stressed, that area constricts and tightens making the nipple as a whole look smaller.
Again, having significant muscle mass beneath that area will help round it out. You can either listen to someone who isn’t 15 years old and has actually worked right next to a plastic surgeon a few times (mostly observing), or you can keep listening to random internet newbies who are just as green as you are.[/quote]
Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that his pectoral development is roughly equivalent to that of some female fitness competitors [to the OP: you’ve got better development than nearly all of them, but I’m just saying this to make a point]
Interesting that when their pictures turn up in “powerful images”, nobody calls them “skinny as fuck” and yells at them to eat more pizza and cake.
My point? Double standards, as usual. Plus this: Fat people pretending that skinny people can’t possibly improve the way they look without engaging in a massive bulking regimen.
“Want to bring out your sixpack? - Eat 3 pizza’s a day and squat till you puke! Hey, it works for [insert name of pro PL’er or weightlifter with 30% BF]”
If that was the case, we’d be telling every 110 lb. female to start chugging down gallons of whole milk and deadlifting till she puked. She couldn’t POSSIBLY improve the way she looked without, at least, doubling her caloric intake…
Right? Going by that logic, we would…
Yet we don’t. Why not? Because that’s bullshit.
“Skinny” people CAN shape their muscles just the same as “bulky” people. Muscle hypertrophy can occur in anyone. It doesn’t spontaneously “activate” at a certain bodyweight.
Now, to the OP, some real advice:
Get tested for gyno, just to eliminate that as a possible cause of your problem.
Look into aromatase inhibitor creams that can be applied topically. This is how the pro’s deal with this “issue” when it arises. If you look around you can find some of these on the market as supplements (rather than prescription drugs).
You can experiment with non-hormonal testosterone boosters.
Read up on bodybuilding routines for sculpting the pecs. Learn the physiology of the muscle so that you know exactly what you are doing in the gym.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Interesting that when their pictures turn up in “powerful images”, nobody calls them “skinny as fuck” and yells at them to eat more pizza and cake. [/quote]
How many of those people who appear in Powerful Images are regular posters here? Considering none of them have anything to do with being posted in a Powerful Image (since someone at Biotest chooses the images), what does that have to do with some guy asking for advice when their problem is clearly a lack of muscular development to reach the look they are after?
[quote]
My point? Double standards, as usual. Plus this: Fat people pretending that skinny people can’t possibly improve the way they look without engaging in a massive bulking regimen.
“Want to bring out your sixpack? - Eat 3 pizza’s a day and squat till you puke! Hey, it works for [insert name of pro PL’er or weightlifter with 30% BF]”
If that was the case, we’d be telling every 110 lb. female to start chugging down gallons of whole milk and deadlifting till she puked. She couldn’t POSSIBLY improve the way she looked without, at least, doubling her caloric intake…
Right? Going by that logic, we would…
Yet we don’t. Why not? Because that’s bullshit.
“Skinny” people CAN shape their muscles just the same as “bulky” people. Muscle hypertrophy can occur in anyone. It doesn’t spontaneously “activate” at a certain bodyweight.
Now, to the OP, some real advice:
Get tested for gyno, just to eliminate that as a possible cause of your problem.
Look into aromatase inhibitor creams that can be applied topically. This is how the pro’s deal with this “issue” when it arises. If you look around you can find some of these on the market as supplements (rather than prescription drugs).
You can experiment with non-hormonal testosterone boosters.
Read up on bodybuilding routines for sculpting the pecs. Learn the physiology of the muscle so that you know exactly what you are doing in the gym. [/quote]
This was pure idiocy. Not only has the kid mentioned he has seen a doctor, but no one here told him to “bulk up” at all. He was told to gain some more muscle on his chest to round it out which is exactly what he should be told.
For someone so quick to call people “bulky”, why haven’t we ever seen what you look like? Further, exactly how deep is that medical training of yours?
@ the double standard concerning men and women:
Perhaps it is because men and women are different to some extent, both physiologically and with regard to what can be considered a desirable goal from an aesthetic viewpoint?
I did see a doctor for a physical so that i could use my college’s gym. But when I was there i didnt mention anything about my chest to him.
[quote]michael2507 wrote:
@ the double standard concerning men and women:
Perhaps it is because men and women are different to some extent, both physiologically and with regard to what can be considered a desirable goal from an aesthetic viewpoint?[/quote]
Of course men and women are different, but that neither explains nor justifies the use of a sexual double standard. Cold and hot are also “different”, but we recognize that they exist at opposite ends of the same spectrum.
In thermodynamics, in fact, there is no such recognized property as “cold”. “Cold” is formally defined as the absence of heat. By expressing one variable in terms of another, much as in an algebraic equation, a meaningful interpretation of both can be attained.
This could not be the case if scientists classified everything according to a bipolar model of “opposites”, or worse, employed multiple definitions for the same terms.
There is a reason why natural languages evolved to use multiple words with different meanings, rather than multiple meanings for the same word. Just think about it. “Cold” is the same everywhere and “strength” is the same for everyone. Only a liberal, commie bastard could ever dream otherwise.
And it should come as no surprise that it’s precisely the liberal “progressive” movement that we have to thank for introducing a new lexicon of meaningless yet “politically correct” terms.
In today’s PC society, everything and everyone is “equal”, which is to say that no unifying standard of criteria is allowed to exist for anything. To put opposing qualities onto the same spectrum would expose fundamental inequalities between them.
For instance, Two and Five cannot occupy the same place on a number line - one of them is necessarily inferior to the other - and this is deemed unacceptable to the collectivist nutbags. The communists have eliminated all of humanity’s faults. How? By making every person strong, intelligent, and brave “in their own way”. Such as to say, they’ve done it through the magic of creating double standards and destroying meaningful language (and by implication, meaningful thought).
[quote]Bezel wrote:
I did see a doctor for a physical so that i could use my college’s gym. But when I was there i didnt mention anything about my chest to him.[/quote]
If you had gyno, your doctor would have mentioned something to you about your chest. It’s their job to notice irregular or unnatural situations that are obviously apparent just by looking at you. Gyno is unnatural.
nominal prospect, keep on topic. Your tangential ramblings are obfuscating.
OP, what’s your diet like?
it appears that you just need some testosterone.
a)No metro sexual things for 3 months. b)No crying about anything except hunger or lack of beer or getting none for 6.
c)Lift weights with no plan just go to the gym for as long as you can and play with the big weights all summer.
d) maybe box a little too
well before i was trying to stay under 2000 calories until a couple weeks ago.
now my diet is something like this
Breakfast:6am
2 eggs+ some egg white(from a box)
2 slices of wheat bread+ peanut butter
2 cups of fat free or 1% milk
1 cup of green tea
snack:10am
2 slices of wheat bread, 4 slices of fat free turkey or chicken and a slice of cheese. 1 cup of milk
OR
4 slices of wheat bread + peanut butter
1 cup of milk
another snack at 1
another snack around 3 or 4
Dinner:7-8pm
varies. Sometimes i just have wheat bread +peanut butter and milk =D(its my favorite)
sometimes i have a chicken breast sandwhich
cup of milk with either.
probably a another snack+cup of milk around 10pm
I read a post from another topic about how much you need to gain weight and i calculated and it was about 2,300 for me. I think im eating enough
and after workouts(around 7 or 8 am) i drink some whey protein+water
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
michael2507 wrote:
@ the double standard concerning men and women:
Perhaps it is because men and women are different to some extent, both physiologically and with regard to what can be considered a desirable goal from an aesthetic viewpoint?
Of course men and women are different, but that neither explains nor justifies the use of a sexual double standard. Cold and hot are also “different”, but we recognize that they exist at opposite ends of the same spectrum.
In thermodynamics, in fact, there is no such recognized property as “cold”. “Cold” is formally defined as the absence of heat. By expressing one variable in terms of another, much as in an algebraic equation, a meaningful interpretation of both can be attained.
This could not be the case if scientists classified everything according to a bipolar model of “opposites”, or worse, employed multiple definitions for the same terms.
There is a reason why natural languages evolved to use multiple words with different meanings, rather than multiple meanings for the same word. Just think about it. “Cold” is the same everywhere and “strength” is the same for everyone. Only a liberal, commie bastard could ever dream otherwise.
And it should come as no surprise that it’s precisely the liberal “progressive” movement that we have to thank for introducing a new lexicon of meaningless yet “politically correct” terms.
In today’s PC society, everything and everyone is “equal”, which is to say that no unifying standard of criteria is allowed to exist for anything. To put opposing qualities onto the same spectrum would expose fundamental inequalities between them.
For instance, Two and Five cannot occupy the same place on a number line - one of them is necessarily inferior to the other - and this is deemed unacceptable to the collectivist nutbags. The communists have eliminated all of humanity’s faults. How? By making every person strong, intelligent, and brave “in their own way”. Such as to say, they’ve done it through the magic of creating double standards and destroying meaningful language (and by implication, meaningful thought).[/quote]
Interesting.
Based on this, what would you suggest when judging female physiques? Going by how close they resemble Zane, Arnold, Big Ron or whomever you consider “the golden standard” of muscular development?
You are missing his point. I beleive he is trying to make a point of how ridiculouse the concept of everyone is equal and the same when we are not. Now it is considered politicly incorrect to judge someone any differently than anyone else so if this is true than a woman should be required to have the same physique as Anorld to be considered as good as him.
But in reality men and women are different and a Women will not obtain his physique which is an example of how ridiculouse these ideas are.
Not saying I neccasarily agree just trying to clear things up.