I thought this write up presents a pretty interesting study that I personally had never heard before. Now before anyone starts complaining (screaming?-lol) one way or another, realize that nowhere does the author ever suggest that PEDs are solely responsible for top quality physiques.
www.kropblog.dk/en/the-big-lie/
Hopefully we’ll get some good insights and thoughts on the topic.
S
Nothing controversial there for anyone with half a brain and looking at the whole issue in an unbiased way.
What I find funny is that it is very often said that PEDs allows you to work harder because recovery is so much better, yet (pro) BBers taking 2g+ of AAS DO NOT work harder/more than most serious natties (especially natural strength athletes like Olympic weightlifters). Note that I don’t I have any doubt in my mind that your recovery is a lot better, it is obvious that enhanced BBers don’t choose/need to train hardER to get ridiculously big.
ps: If you don’t believe me that the training of pro BBers is not hard, look up what NATURAL Olympic Weightlifters do in a week.
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
Nothing controversial there for anyone with half a brain and looking at the whole issue in an unbiased way.
What I find funny is that it is very often said that PEDs allows you to work harder because recovery is so much better, yet (pro) BBers taking 2g+ of AAS DO NOT work harder/more than most serious natties (especially natural strength athletes like Olympic weightlifters). Note that I don’t I have any doubt in my mind that your recovery is a lot better, it is obvious that enhanced BBers don’t choose/need to train hardER to get ridiculously big.
ps: If you don’t believe me that the training of pro BBers is not hard, look up what NATURAL Olympic Weightlifters do in a week.[/quote]
except you have no idea which weightlifters are truly naturalâ?¦
The only thing that irks me about SOME people who use ped’s is when they deny it, I mean outright lie about it.
Top Ramen and tuna! Just eat your vitamins, little hulkamaniac!
Such horse shit.
I look at the guys and girls here who use gear and are up front about it as just being on the next level above me. They’ve taken that next step, beyond what is “naturally” possible.
If you pull 900 and are on gear some people might say, “Bullshit, anybody can do that if they’re on 'roids!”…nope. That’s still 900 pounds being picked up. That is far beyond anything I will ever attain and to me they are brave for doing that.
George Leeman touched on this in one of his videos.
If somebody wants to juice, more power to them!
I just get pissed when they lie and claim to be natural, maybe even pass a drug screen then set the bar out of reach for us natty, lower echelon lifters.
[quote]tork94 wrote:
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
Nothing controversial there for anyone with half a brain and looking at the whole issue in an unbiased way.
What I find funny is that it is very often said that PEDs allows you to work harder because recovery is so much better, yet (pro) BBers taking 2g+ of AAS DO NOT work harder/more than most serious natties (especially natural strength athletes like Olympic weightlifters). Note that I don’t I have any doubt in my mind that your recovery is a lot better, it is obvious that enhanced BBers don’t choose/need to train hardER to get ridiculously big.
ps: If you don’t believe me that the training of pro BBers is not hard, look up what NATURAL Olympic Weightlifters do in a week.[/quote]
except you have no idea which weightlifters are truly naturalâ?¦[/quote]
Doesn’t fucking matter. There are plenty of dedicated guys on no gear that train more/harder than top level bodybuilders, powerlifters, and strongmen.
You can train pretty much as hard as you want without gear. The main difference is that with gear you’ll get way more bang for your buck. You don’t “need” steroids to recover, as in, you would be physically incapable of recovering in time for your next workout. That’s just called building a decent work capacity. It will just make your body grow more in size and strength from the work you do.
I’m a bit torn on the honesty issue: Part of me wishes that pro’s and amateurs were honest about how they achieve their goals, but the other part of me knows that, like everything, the ability to be honest is tied to money. Sponsors don’t want someone who says ‘gear got me here’ because it doesn’t sell the sponsors’ product.
While not terribly knowledgeable about the subject, a few points come to mind.
While it doesn’t specifically say, I am assuming, as the subjects were willing to go 10-20 weeks without training, that these were all sedentary males. I would hazard to guess the “training” involved in these studies would be considered a joke by any serious litter. The “gains” experienced by the 10 week group would probably disappear in a few days. (More experienced guys please chime in if I’m off here) It appears that the high dose 20 week group probably did gain some actual muscle, but again these are sedentary guys, so…
I’m just not really sure the point. Is this guy trying to say that if you just sat on the couch or did zumba/p90x you would get about the same results as following a well thought out plan, executed with intensity and consistency?
Is the point that ped users will get more results than there identical non-using parallel universe twin? I think everybody knows this already.
I am pretty sure you would see different results with a trained/highly trained study group. If you put someone like Stu on 600 mgs a week and told him not to train for 20 weeks, I bet he would get smaller. (Though less so than without peds) I would hazard the top assisted guys generally work as hard as the top natural guys, but of course end up bigger stronger because of the peds.
I think his point is that the roidz are a magic pill, because even the guys who were sedentary gained fat free muscle mass. Albeit not as much as the ones who trained and were assisted, but if these claims are legit I think the efficacy of test is pretty amazing. Seriously dont do shit but inject but still grow???
This is in direct contrast to the usual thought that you cant just take steroids to get big you have to put in the work. The author is saying that this is technically not true at all.
Interesting, again for medicinal purposes I can see how this could be used for very sick people who have been weakened because of their illness.
[quote]tork94 wrote:
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
Nothing controversial there for anyone with half a brain and looking at the whole issue in an unbiased way.
What I find funny is that it is very often said that PEDs allows you to work harder because recovery is so much better, yet (pro) BBers taking 2g+ of AAS DO NOT work harder/more than most serious natties (especially natural strength athletes like Olympic weightlifters). Note that I don’t I have any doubt in my mind that your recovery is a lot better, it is obvious that enhanced BBers don’t choose/need to train hardER to get ridiculously big.
ps: If you don’t believe me that the training of pro BBers is not hard, look up what NATURAL Olympic Weightlifters do in a week.[/quote]
except you have no idea which weightlifters are truly naturalâ?¦[/quote]
You never know for sure, but I would bet that the Clarence0 (youtube name) and the MDUSA guys are natty.
[quote]csulli wrote:
You can train pretty much as hard as you want without gear. The main difference is that with gear you’ll get way more bang for your buck. You don’t “need” steroids to recover, as in, you would be physically incapable of recovering in time for your next workout. That’s just called building a decent work capacity. It will just make your body grow more in size and strength from the work you do.[/quote]
I actually disagree here. While we are on the same page that natties can do a shitload more than most people on this forum believe is feasible for a natty, I firmly believe that proper use of PEDs will upregulate your work capacity (way) beyond what is possible without them.
Don’t confuse comparing enhanced people with shitty work capacity with natties with great ones. Remember what I said in the overtraining thread: for every lifter there will be a training protocol that will send him to aovertraining/overreaching state. I’m pretty sure that throwing in PED into mix that training protocol would be significantly tougher.
[quote]MattyXL wrote:
This is in direct contrast to the usual thought that you cant just take steroids to get big you have to put in the work. The author is saying that this is technically not true at all.
Interesting, again for medicinal purposes I can see how this could be used for very sick people who have been weakened because of their illness.[/quote]
Yep, but I seriously doubt that gaining muscle on PEDs without training would continue indefinitely. Still the point remains that most people exaggerate exactly how much work enhanced lifters have to put into. It seems that the best scenario is that they work as hard as serious natties - more/harder is not needed.
AAS are used already for that very purpose.
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
[quote]MattyXL wrote:
This is in direct contrast to the usual thought that you cant just take steroids to get big you have to put in the work. The author is saying that this is technically not true at all.
Interesting, again for medicinal purposes I can see how this could be used for very sick people who have been weakened because of their illness.[/quote]
Yep, but I seriously doubt that gaining muscle on PEDs without training would continue indefinitely. Still the point remains that most people exaggerate exactly how much work enhanced lifters have to put into. It seems that the best scenario is that they work as hard as serious natties - more/harder is not needed.
AAS are used already for that very purpose.[/quote]
I agree and am aware that AAS is used for alot of muscle wasting diseases, but never saw Test used, I wonder if this could also be used as an alternative maybe Test is a cheaper alternative?
[quote]MattyXL wrote:
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
[quote]MattyXL wrote:
This is in direct contrast to the usual thought that you cant just take steroids to get big you have to put in the work. The author is saying that this is technically not true at all.
Interesting, again for medicinal purposes I can see how this could be used for very sick people who have been weakened because of their illness.[/quote]
Yep, but I seriously doubt that gaining muscle on PEDs without training would continue indefinitely. Still the point remains that most people exaggerate exactly how much work enhanced lifters have to put into. It seems that the best scenario is that they work as hard as serious natties - more/harder is not needed.
AAS are used already for that very purpose.[/quote]
I agree and am aware that AAS is used for alot of muscle wasting diseases, but never saw Test used, I wonder if this could also be used as an alternative maybe Test is a cheaper alternative?
[/quote]
What are they using? Tren? ha
LOL, I heard of Winstrol, Anavar and Deca used for AIDS patients but never Test. Im sure they have though
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
You can train pretty much as hard as you want without gear. The main difference is that with gear you’ll get way more bang for your buck. You don’t “need” steroids to recover, as in, you would be physically incapable of recovering in time for your next workout. That’s just called building a decent work capacity. It will just make your body grow more in size and strength from the work you do.[/quote]
I actually disagree here. While we are on the same page that natties can do a shitload more than most people on this forum believe is feasible for a natty, I firmly believe that proper use of PEDs will upregulate your work capacity (way) beyond what is possible without them.
Don’t confuse comparing enhanced people with shitty work capacity with natties with great ones. Remember what I said in the overtraining thread: for every lifter there will be a training protocol that will send him to aovertraining/overreaching state. I’m pretty sure that throwing in PED into mix that training protocol would be significantly tougher. [/quote]
On second thought I guess that has to be objectively true. There is theoretically a level at which someone with the best work capacity in the world literally could not recover, and adding steroids would increase that ceiling.
I also think it depends on the person. Some people are what I would consider hyper responders to anabolics, some don’t respond well at all and some fall in between. I personally have close friends who take 3-5 times the dosages I do and still struggle to attain size and strength with what I experience on much lower dosages.
PEDs definitely help anyone gaining size and strength just so many other factors in the boat too. Diet, routine, genetics, etc. They are definitely a game changer in many regards especially when you start tossing in GH as well.
[quote]Bauber wrote:
I also think it depends on the person. Some people are what I would consider hyper responders to anabolics, some don’t respond well at all and some fall in between. I personally have close friends who take 3-5 times the dosages I do and still struggle to attain size and strength with what I experience on much lower dosages.
PEDs definitely help anyone gaining size and strength just so many other factors in the boat too. Diet, routine, genetics, etc. They are definitely a game changer in many regards especially when you start tossing in GH as well. [/quote]
I think this is a great point. We can name a few past IFBB Pros who were always maintaining that they used much less than the general public seemed to think. The concept of different levels of responsiveness, especially when you’re discussing hormonal based substances, makes a lot of sense.
All the way at the other end of the spectrum of course, are the guys who may take ‘average’ amounts of PEDs (I’m not as well versed as some in this topic, but I think you get what I mean), but combined with their lack of quality nutrition, and training protocols, it’s possible no one would even suspect their usage. Hence the fail safe argument to the old “If I took as much as Ronnie Coleman, I’d be Mr. Olympia too” line of BS -lol.
S
Interesting, had never heard of that study or those results. Would be nice to gain ~7 pounds of muscle in 3 months not even lifting… Much less more than that. Jeez… Almost makes a guy start thinking
Sure the guys who did nothing gained muscle, although probably a lot less than those numbers would suggest (water?). Everyday life was enough stimulus for them to carry the muscle mass they had, add peds and the muscular adaptation in response to that stimulus was higher. Again, take the water gains out of the picture and they got a little muscle.
Is this really a surprise to anyone? Many guys off the street are reasonably (an ambiguous term) strong and muscular without any training, presumably because of genitics -higher natural levels, better response to hormones or whatever. I’m pretty sure most TRT patients see body composition changes even without training.
Extrapolating the results of a study, any study, done on a sedentary population to high level bodybuilders or powerlifters is pure speculation. If Bauber stopped training but upped his dose, would he get bigger?
Again, what is the point being made here? That assisted guys don’t have to work harder than natural guys to get more results? I don’t know a lot about the subject, but I never knew that was a point of contention. Peds = more results, muscle/strength, from whatever stimulus is provided, be that daily living or hard training. Maybe I’m off base here, but I thought that was well understood?
[quote]Waylon wrote:
Again, what is the point being made here? That assisted guys don’t have to work harder than natural guys to get more results? I don’t know a lot about the subject, but I never knew that was a point of contention. Peds = more results, muscle/strength, from whatever stimulus is provided, be that daily living or hard training. Maybe I’m off base here, but I thought that was well understood?[/quote]
While I can’t speak for anyone else, I will say I’d never really considered “daily living” as a possible stimulus. Makes perfect sense though.