natural bodybuilding aint that bad

[busyB]

this guy is legit drug free..

Is it just me or does this guy need a sports bra? His damn tits are sagging!!

[Moosejay]

don't think that everyone who is big is drugfree. here's a picture of me and i have some friends who are drugfree!!

Damnb, you look great!

May I ask your age?

Mike

[Van_Bilderass]

Supplements have changed GREATLY over 30 years, as well.

Nutrition and by extension nutritional supplementation hasn't really changed at all. Here's an example: milk is a blend of whey and casein. Nutritional manipulation has nothing to do with the evolution of today's physiques.

The only supplements that have had any impact are the hormones that have recently been sold OTC. But they are just unscheduled anabolic steroids, not nutritional supplements.

[gh15]

there are not naturals,,theindonisian would be standing 126lb with out hormones and the irish guy is hormonized at the median level as in heavy doses here and there shrinking and bulking yet nothing to write home about due to average muscle respond to hormones,,
both are hormonized and been swimming in drugs for long time,,it has nothign to do with supplement because supplement are junk,,go eat banana and egg whites papeti foods,,infact go eat jamaican food and you will look better than any suiuplement user

[SirTraps]

 

[MCWAY]

Nutrition and by extension nutritional supplementation hasn't really changed at all. Here's an example: milk is a blend of whey and casein. Nutritional manipulation has nothing to do with the evolution of today's physiques.

The only supplements that have had any impact are the hormones that have recently been sold OTC. But they are just unscheduled anabolic steroids, not nutritional supplements.

I have to disagree with you. As I mentioned before, we have supplements like creatine (and its souped-up versions on the market today). How would soemone have been able to consume 10-20 grams of creatine per day, without having stock in a slaughterhouse and downing a side of beef every 24 hours?

And, then, there are the fat-burners, which consist of concentrated herbs and substances that would be nearly impossible to consume (in effective doses) from regular food.

I think Ron Harris said it well in his "Dream Killer" article in MuscleMag, (and I'm paraphrasing this from memory) "Keep thinking that you can't get a great physique without drugs, and I assure you that you won't"

[hazbin]

Damnb, you look great!

May I ask your age?

Mike

42

[timfogarty]

I have to disagree with you. As I mentioned before, we have supplements like creatine (and its souped-up versions on the market today). How would soemone have been able to consume 10-20 grams of creatine per day, without having stock in a slaughterhouse and downing a side of beef every 24 hours?

show us any evidence that 10-20 grams of creatine has any effect on building muscle.  Sure it pumps you up, but you haven't actually added any muscle mass.

if any of the supplements available at the health food store were effective, why isn't the average (non-steroided) gym goer any bigger that what they were 20-30 years ago?

[Kegdrainer]

don't think that everyone who is big is drugfree. here's a picture of me and i have some friends who are drugfree!!

yeah, and i don't drink!

[MCWAY]

show us any evidence that 10-20 grams of creatine has any effect on building muscle.  Sure it pumps you up, but you haven't actually added any muscle mass.

Speak for yourself. Creatine has done right by me (Yes, I have gone periods without using it; and, yes, the size I gained while using it remained).

if any of the supplements available at the health food store were effective, why isn't the average (non-steroided) gym goer any bigger that what they were 20-30 years ago?

You are alleging that, over the last two to three decades, that the only folks who have improved their physiques are steroid users? That makes no sense, whatsoever.

I suppose the minor fact that creatine has been arguably the most popular supplement over the last 10-15 years, with testimonies galore (here and in gyms nationwide) were just for "placebo" purposes.

Furthermore, I thought the supplement for pumps was L-arginine, not creatine (although many NO products have both creatine and L-arginine in them). In any event, the products today are FAR better than they were, when I first started training in the late 80s. Outside of protein powders and carb-heavy weight gainers, the selection was rather meager.

I agree with Lee Priest, when he says that, while he's all for being open about steroid use in bodybuilding, the problem with talking about it so much is that too many people get crippled and think that they can't do jack without drugs. As he puts it, There are people who climb Mt. Everest with no legs. And you're telling me you can't put 10 lbs. on your bench, unless you pop some D-bol?" (paraphrasing from memory).

[timfogarty]

first, fix your quote tags. 

And you're telling me you can't put 10 lbs. on your bench, unless you pop some D-bol?

no, I'm saying that other than proteins, EFAs and multivitamins, everything you can buy at a health food store is worthless.  creatine does not build muscle. NO supplements do not build muscle.   Even with spending hundreds of dollars a month on the latest must have supplements, the average gym goer is no more muscular than the average gym goer of 20 years ago.

[NarcissisticDeity]

no, I'm saying that other than proteins, EFAs and multivitamins, everything you can buy at a health food store is worthless.

Ain't that the truth !

[hazbin]

yeah, and i don't drink!

hey bro. you might want to read what i said again. i'm not saying i'm drugfree. just fukkin around and seeing who is paying attention. obviously you are not.

[MCWAY]

first, fix your quote tags. 

no, I'm saying that other than proteins, EFAs and multivitamins, everything you can buy at a health food store is worthless.  creatine does not build muscle. NO supplements do not build muscle.   Even with spending hundreds of dollars a month on the latest must have supplements, the average gym goer is no more muscular than the average gym goer of 20 years ago.

They're fixed!!!

Using "the average gym goer" doesn't say a whole lot, as "The average gym goer" is one of the resolutionist-types that stops training after 3-4 months.

The benefit of good supplement is that it AIDS in the building of muscle and/or burning fat. Creatine and NO products definitely help in that area (building muscle, that is). Can you build mass without them? Absolutely!! Can you do so faster with them? YOU BETCHA!!! They aren't necessary, but they definitely help the cause. Same goes for fat-burners. Can you get ripped without them? YEP!!! Can you get ripped faster with them? Of course!!!

[boonstack]

there is no such thing as natural bodybuilding, there is bodybuilding and there's lifting weights for looking athletic and being healthy
for instance when somebody mentiones the word bodybuilder what comes to mind first? a big muscular dude or a female that would make a perfect candidate for starring in wrong turn 3 right?

Oh... well i was under the impression that working out without steroids was considered a "natural" approach? 

[timfogarty]

Creatine and NO products definitely help in that area (building muscle, that is).

there is no legitimate scientific evidence to support your claim.    There has been papers published showing that they do not.  At the 2004 International Society of Sports Nutrition Conference in Las Vegas, there were four poster sessions that concluded N O supplements did not work.  Summaries could be found here, but unfortunately, that's now behind a paid firewall.   But there is still this: http://www.ast-ss.com/articles/article.asp?AID=117

[BEAST 8692]

there is no legitimate scientific evidence to support your claim.    There has been papers published showing that they do not.  At the 2004 International Society of Sports Nutrition Conference in Las Vegas, there were four poster sessions that concluded N O supplements did not work.  Summaries could be found here, but unfortunately, that's now behind a paid firewall.   But there is still this: http://www.ast-ss.com/articles/article.asp?AID=117

some people get water retention with creatine which obviously makes them feel and appear fuller, as well as weigh more. definitely seems to help with training (prob from the water retention). i really don't know about the other muscle component science, so much bs with supplements, but if it saves me the pressure of eating kilos of red meat every day i'm for it.

[Hedgehog]

The drier part isn't that big of an issue. Back in the day, bodybuilders got marked down for appearing too ripped in contests. To the judges, the look was unhealthy. The mega-ripped look became a way for smaller bodybuilders to impress the judges to make up for the lack of size (that's how Frank Zane earned 3 Olympia titles at the expenses of Robby Robinson and Mike Mentzer).

Supplements have changed GREATLY over 30 years, as well. 30 years ago, bodybuilders has little variety, as far as supplements went. Most were just concentrated forms of food (i.e. milk-and-egg protein powder, dessicated liver tablets, etc.). Now, you can take lots of creatine, without having to down half a cow in the process. Or, you can take herbs that (in high doses) are diruetics to get rid of excess water.

Now, does that mean that everyone who competes in natural bodybuilding contests are "clean"? NOPE!!! But, that certainly doesn't mean that everyone who enters such shows are using drugs. What I'd like to know is how the drug-using competitors feel when they enter "natural" shows and still get beat. They may be the biggest ones crying foul.

There are three supplements that have been proven to work:

Creatine

Baking soda

Caffeine


Anything else are not backed up by science.

Whole food isn't inferior to protein drinks. If anything, it is superior, since it contains various vitamins, minerals and antioxidants, flavonoids et al, @ healthy levels.

Contrary to popular belief, overdosing on vitamins, even the water-solulable kind, isn't good for you.

[SteelePegasus]

there are not naturals,,theindonisian would be standing 126lb with out hormones and the irish guy is hormonized at the median level as in heavy doses here and there shrinking and bulking yet nothing to write home about due to average muscle respond to hormones,,
both are hormonized and been swimming in drugs for long time,,it has nothign to do with supplement because supplement are junk,,go eat banana and egg whites papeti foods,,infact go eat jamaican food and you will look better than any suiuplement user

My friend I do every day

Stew chicken with rice and peas
Curry chicken with rice and peas
Curry Goat """
OxTail
Roti

unfortunately that food is very heavy, carb and fat laiden  

[njflex]

YOU can will your body to do anything as long as your genetic predisposition allows,anything else beyond that point needs other aides to achieve a condition or size increase.a good build is a good build no matter how u built it whether clean or not,but to compare or try to emulate a high drug standard physique is chasing a wet dream.to achieve an in shape for your frame,genetics,muscle shape no matter the bodyweight achieved is a better route,but the bb industry as a whole leads most to pro mindset with leaving the main ingrediant used to get there and no creatine or xenedrine ad will get it.thats why most trainees bail out or hit sauce early on.whether you drug or not the main goal is to train,eat,rest 3 simple rules to get a good physique.

[MCWAY]

There are three supplements that have been proven to work:

Creatine

Baking soda

Caffeine


Anything else are not backed up by science.

Whole food isn't inferior to protein drinks. If anything, it is superior, since it contains various vitamins, minerals and antioxidants, flavonoids et al, @ healthy levels.

Contrary to popular belief, overdosing on vitamins, even the water-solulable kind, isn't good for you.

I never claimed that whole food was inferior to protein drinks. With that said, they're a HUGE help to those who have difficulty putting on mass, especially those with jobs that don't allow them to halt all their activities just to eat.

Furthermore, if everyone waited until certain supplements or nutritional or training principles were "backed by science", virtually NOBODY would put on any size. After all, there were/are folks who claim that bodybuilders don't need more protein than the average joe. Their claims are "backed by science". Same goes for creatine, which you have stated is proven to work. Yet, others have claimed that creatine doesn't work and such a declaration is "backed by science". Same goes for NO products. Lots of people on this thread have used them and like the results they've attained with them. Yet, you have posts like this:

there is no legitimate scientific evidence to support your claim.    There has been papers published showing that they do not.  At the 2004 International Society of Sports Nutrition Conference in Las Vegas, there were four poster sessions that concluded N O supplements did not work.  Summaries could be found here, but unfortunately, that's now behind a paid firewall.   But there is still this: http://www.ast-ss.com/articles/article.asp?AID=117

As I've said before, scientists have made more than their share of findings that have been shown to be false in real world applications. At one point, scientists claimed that no one could run a mile in under 4 minutes. Yet, Roger Bannister did it (3 minutes, 59.4 seconds) and his feat has been duplicated many times since then.

[timfogarty]

As I've said before, scientists have made more than their share of findings that have been shown to be false in real world applications. At one point, scientists claimed that no one could run a mile in under 4 minutes.

no, scientists did not.

individuals making comments that get quoted in the press is not the same as published scientific research.   

The best type of research for things like supplements are double blind studies, where neither the person administering the test nor the person taking the supplement knows whether they're taking the real thing or a placebo.   such studies on NO2 supplements show that it does not build muscle.

in addition if a supplement works, you should be able to explain how it works.  sure creatine can increase ATP in the cells, but no correlation has been found between increased ATP and building muscle.  and 2 grams of creatine is enough to saturate the cells with ATP.  20 grams a day is a complete waste of money.

now there are all these variations of creatine.  if 2 grams of plain old creatine monohydrate quickly saturates the cells, why would you pay extra for some new variety?

[MCWAY]

no, scientists did not.

individuals making comments that get quoted in the press is not the same as published scientific research.   

The best type of research for things like supplements are double blind studies, where neither the person administering the test nor the person taking the supplement knows whether they're taking the real thing or a placebo.   such studies on NO2 supplements show that it does not build muscle.

Research helps, but again, it all goes back to real-world use by folks in the gym. Many have use NO products with good results. I seriously doubt those results are going to simply vanish, because some double-blind studies claim that NO doesn't work.

in addition if a supplement works, you should be able to explain how it works.  sure creatine can increase ATP in the cells, but no correlation has been found between increased ATP and building muscle.  and 2 grams of creatine is enough to saturate the cells with ATP.  20 grams a day is a complete waste of money.

Hardly!! In fact, I remember the very first time I used creatine in 1996. It was creatine capsules. The recommended amount was to take 2 grams (2 capsules) per day. I took four per day and got nothing out of it. A month later, I was out of reading material and decided to buy an issue of Muscle Media (Danny Hester and Vince Galanti were on the cover). Based on what I read, I decided to give Phosphagen HP a try, using the loading phase. One week and 7 lbs. later, (from 212 to 219) I became a believer in what creatine can do. The following week, using the maintenance dose, I put on aonther three lbs, not to mention a major boost in strength.

I've often described creatine as the crack of supplements, in that most people get the most outrageous results the first time they use it.

now there are all these variations of creatine.  if 2 grams of plain old creatine monohydrate quickly saturates the cells, why would you pay extra for some new variety?

Perhaps, it's because the new variations get more creatine into the cells.

[timfogarty]

Research helps, but again, it all goes back to real-world use by folks in the gym. Many have use NO products with good results. I seriously doubt those results are going to simply vanish, because some double-blind studies claim that NO doesn't work.

and many people have used NO without any results.  Perhaps the people who got good results would have made gains anyway, and it is only coincidence that gains happened at the same time they were taking NO.

Perhaps, it's because the new variations get more creatine into the cells.

saturated is saturated.  if 2 grams of monohydrate saturate the cells, a different type will not put more into the cells because a cell can only reach it's saturation point. 

[DK II]

and many people have used NO without any results.  Perhaps the people who got good results would have made gains anyway, and it is only coincidence that gains happened at the same time they were taking NO.

saturated is saturated.  if 2 grams of monohydrate saturate the cells, a different type will not put more into the cells because a cell can only reach it's saturation point. 

Good post.

The "new" forms of creatine are just expensive bullshit. Just buy creapure and you're fine.