[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:
[quote]gregron wrote:
[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:
[quote]Michael Crehan wrote:
rewind the the beginning of this thread: How can it be proven that he is not natural?[/quote]
how can it be proven he is natral ;)[/quote]
Exactly.
It’s all arguing semantics but if you honestly think this guy, as a natural, has built a physique that rivals/surpasses Arnold then that’s on you.
This is in no way taking away from what he accomplished. All the steroids in the worlds won’t make you look like this guy without incredible amounts of hard work and dedication coupled with great genetics.[/quote]
this.
there is no real proof of his gear use. but this man is almost the size of a 7x my olympia who keep in mind had great genetics and was juicing since his mid teens. so why cant people seem to understand mine and other sceptisim about him being natty.
the man has a great physique and has worked hard to get it, but sorry he isnt natty not by a long shot. [/quote]
Muslcemania is drugtested. Yes, he could fool the drug test, but he would get caught eventually. I’m not saying for 100% that he is natty, but he could be. I think it’s impolite to just call steroids. He has wide shoulders, narrow waist and great insertion points. Combine that with being naturally big and you have Simeon Panda.



