Author Topic: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????  (Read 30151 times)

JOHN MATRIX

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 13281
  • the Media is the Problem
was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« on: December 30, 2008, 06:42:42 PM »
if it can be settled that in fact he was then i believe it would settle the question of who the strongest man ever is. if he was indeed natural then how could anyone dispute him being the strongest man ever

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83643
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #1 on: December 30, 2008, 06:47:12 PM »
if it can be settled that in fact he was then i believe it would settle the question of who the strongest man ever is. if he was indeed natural then how could anyone dispute him being the strongest man ever

good question  ???

johnny1

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2493
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #2 on: December 30, 2008, 06:54:33 PM »
Hard question to answer with certainty, Paul was in his prime in the 1950's trained with alot of crude homemade equipment etc, he certainly was unbelievably strong and @ 310-350lbs (though out his prime years) had some of the most massive quads ever.

ribonucleic

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5158
  • I bring you ultimate reality!
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #3 on: December 30, 2008, 06:59:11 PM »
I think Anderson had access to some radical scientific breakthrough in muscle-building that Tesla invented but the government kept from public knowledge.

That's my opinion.

chaos

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 59569
  • Ron "There is no freedom of speech here" Avidan
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #4 on: December 30, 2008, 07:00:53 PM »
As natural as the sun rising to the West.
Liar!!!!Filt!!!!

timfogarty

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7108
  • @fogartyTim on twitter
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #5 on: December 30, 2008, 08:59:44 PM »
they were readily available.  what reason would he have for not trying something new?   your frame of reference of what is cheating and what is not didn't exist back then.

JOHN MATRIX

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 13281
  • the Media is the Problem
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #6 on: December 30, 2008, 10:29:46 PM »
they were readily available.  what reason would he have for not trying something new?   your frame of reference of what is cheating and what is not didn't exist back then.

i wasnt aware that steroids were readily available america in the 50's ??? 

timfogarty

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7108
  • @fogartyTim on twitter
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #7 on: December 30, 2008, 10:45:40 PM »
i wasnt aware that steroids were readily available america in the 50's ??? 

the first reference to anabolic steroids in a bodybuilding magazine was in Strength and Health in 1938.   Injectable testosterone esters were available throughout the 40s.  Dianabol was widely available at pharmacies in the US by 1958.

Method101

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8455
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #8 on: December 30, 2008, 11:12:26 PM »
steroids were available to some people around 1918... they were experimented with during ww1. All athletes were using them by the 1930s, anyone who came after that time period was definatly on steroids.

fredrollon

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 974
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #9 on: December 31, 2008, 12:46:39 AM »
Quote
steroids were available to some people around 1918... they were experimented with during ww1. All athletes were using them by the 1930s, anyone who came after that time period was definatly on steroids.

Er...no.A commercially viable method of synthesizing testosterone was discovered round 1935.
Ruzicka and Butenandt won the 1939 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for this breakthrough.

nycbull

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5763
  • Team Jay Should Have Won
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #10 on: December 31, 2008, 04:10:09 AM »
the first reference to anabolic steroids in a bodybuilding magazine was in Strength and Health in 1938.   Injectable testosterone esters were available throughout the 40s.  Dianabol was widely available at pharmacies in the US by 1958.

good post, this has been discussed a lot here and good to finally put it to rest..Im sure a lot of those old timers  were using small amounts of deca.

Figo

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8101
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #11 on: December 31, 2008, 04:16:58 AM »
the first reference to anabolic steroids in a bodybuilding magazine was in Strength and Health in 1938.   Injectable testosterone esters were available throughout the 40s.  Dianabol was widely available at pharmacies in the US by 1958.

Correct. Most think that due to dbol only becoming available in the mid-50's, that that was the 1st of any steroid available. Whereas test was available in the 30's.

MuscleMcMannus

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6236
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #12 on: December 31, 2008, 04:17:27 AM »
steroids were available to some people around 1918... they were experimented with during ww1. All athletes were using them by the 1930s, anyone who came after that time period was definatly on steroids.

You're an idiot. 

Figo

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8101
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #13 on: December 31, 2008, 04:19:10 AM »
good post, this has been discussed a lot here and good to finally put it to rest..Im sure a lot of those old timers  were using small amounts of deca.

Why small amounts? There were no reported dangers, sides nor was it illegal. Like anything else, the story would've been, if it works, use more.

BM OUT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8229
  • Getbig!
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #14 on: December 31, 2008, 06:22:34 AM »
I believe he was natural.His whole life was dedicated to Christ.Not like some of these Phony Christians,but a guy that spent every dime he had on a boys home for wayward youth.

However,if he did use,who cares?A guy that could squat 900lbs three times a day for months to raise money for his home is still as strong or stronger then any human who has ever walked the face of the earth.By the way,he did this in dress pants.

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83643
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #15 on: December 31, 2008, 06:29:47 AM »
the first reference to anabolic steroids in a bodybuilding magazine was in Strength and Health in 1938.   Injectable testosterone esters were available throughout the 40s.  Dianabol was widely available at pharmacies in the US by 1958.

You always type this referenced in 1938 , Da Vinci referenced the parachute in 1483 it doesn't mean people were base jumping

Dianabol was the first commercially available anabolic use specifically for sports supplementation , until then there was no drug use in American weightlifting & bodybuilding

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83643
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #16 on: December 31, 2008, 06:36:17 AM »
good post, this has been discussed a lot here and good to finally put it to rest..Im sure a lot of those old timers  were using small amounts of deca.

Nonsense , in the very late 1950s they started testing weightlifters with d-bol NOT bodybuilders , weightlifting was viewed as the manly sport and bodybuilding was seen as you guessed it a sport for fairies , Ziegler who created dianabol started giving it to weightlifters ONLY at York it wasn't until the 1960 the earliest did the drug start making it's way out to the west coast bodybuilding scene .

dr.chimps

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 28635
  • Chimpus ergo sum
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #17 on: December 31, 2008, 07:01:33 AM »
Calvin Trillin wrote an article on Paul in '69 for the New Yorker titled 'World's Strongest Man.'* If I remember correctly, Mr. Anderson was quite the Christian and tried to spread the Word with his lifts as a sideshow. I think he also ran a home/orphanage for kids. Maybe Google-fu Trillin + Paul Anderson.

*Appears also in Trillin's US Journal (1971) of which I have a copy somewhere     

local hero

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8714
  • mma finance warrior of peace
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #18 on: December 31, 2008, 10:24:12 AM »
what does bein a christian have anything to do with it,,, some of the biggest peodofiles and generaly horrible c,u,n,t,s have been hiding behind the church.......


natural or not,,, not many human beings are able to squat 900lbs

timfogarty

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7108
  • @fogartyTim on twitter
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #19 on: December 31, 2008, 10:27:35 AM »
Dianabol was the first commercially available anabolic use specifically for sports supplementation , until then there was no drug use in American weightlifting & bodybuilding

that testosterone proprionate was mentioned by name in a bodybuilding mag in 1938 makes it pretty hard to say that there was NO drug use in weightlifting or bodybuilding for another 20 years.


NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83643
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #20 on: December 31, 2008, 10:30:15 AM »
that testosterone proprionate was mentioned by name in a bodybuilding mag in 1938 makes it pretty hard to say that there was NO drug use in weightlifting or bodybuilding for another 20 years.



Sure there was because there was NO mention of it at ALL until Ziegler , none what so ever not in weight lifting and not in bodybuilding

like the da Vinci idea on the parachute it was mentioned in 1483

timfogarty

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7108
  • @fogartyTim on twitter
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #21 on: December 31, 2008, 10:53:36 AM »
Sure there was because there was NO mention of it at ALL until Ziegler , none what so ever not in weight lifting and not in bodybuilding

late 1947 or early 48, there is an articles about George Eiferman, already a national level bodybuilder based on the east coast, going out to Yarick's gym in Oakland for the summer, coming back 30-40 pounds heavier.   Similar story the following year about Jack Delinger, also going out to Yaricks for the summer coming back much heavier.  btw, they won the 48 and 49 Mr America.

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83643
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #22 on: December 31, 2008, 10:55:42 AM »
late 1947 or early 48, there is an articles about George Eiferman, already a national level bodybuilder based on the east coast, going out to Yarick's gym in Oakland for the summer, coming back 30-40 pounds heavier.   Similar story the following year about Jack Delinger, also going out to Yaricks for the summer coming back much heavier.  btw, they won the 48 and 49 Mr America.

30-40 pounds? that wouldn't take place with todays supplements nevermind dosages that low when they first started using

timfogarty

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7108
  • @fogartyTim on twitter
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #23 on: December 31, 2008, 11:13:41 AM »
30-40 pounds? that wouldn't take place with todays supplements nevermind dosages that low when they first started using

yes, an adolescent just starting to work out and eat right.  but these were already national level bodybuilders.


there is no way to know who used what when, but there is certainly plenty of circumstantial evidence that means that it was possible that top bodybuilders were using in the 1940s.

BM OUT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8229
  • Getbig!
Re: was Paul Anderson NATURAL?????????
« Reply #24 on: December 31, 2008, 11:17:00 AM »
what does bein a christian have anything to do with it,,, some of the biggest peodofiles and generaly horrible c,u,n,t,s have been hiding behind the church.......


natural or not,,, not many human beings are able to squat 900lbs

There is a HUGE differance between church going Bible thumpers and a guy who has dedicated his life to helping kids.I just dont believe he would use steroids.He was a REAL Christian,not a Catholic priest Christian.