The envelope of the system often changes its color, but the underlying mechanisms remain the same as they exploit constants like the human nature. A poorly planned modification of the main blueprint can cut the juice to the money printer. Hence the old comics selling you push-ups on a chair and chest expanders as a way to obtain arnoldesque pecs are replaced by Instagram posts of gym bros using encrypted text messages to order trenbolone.
Yet the core is preserved. The dealers of hope are still on juice, and the sacred muscle mass which the lifters are chasing is still designed to initiate the ultimate ascension plan. The unaware souls yearning for thicker muscles fibers continue to generate the real profit in both situations.
Those driving principles will remain in place until the end of the industry. New actors will be hired. The image definition will improve, but the plot will remain untouched. The deception will keep spinning.
In this post, I will present 9 lies spread consciously and unconsciously by roid heads non-stop.
1. You will become as big as them if you do like them.
Many kids are still convinced that a perfect emulation of thong warriors’ lifestyle results in insane growth. This belief is common among total beginners and people who form their notions regarding the muscle building industry from mainstream movies, commercials, prejudice and gossip.
Ironically, many experienced men have a hard time abandoning this concept too. Truth hurts. The overwhelming evidence intensifies the pain and makes it even harder to accept the facts. The mind creates a safety bubble acting as a coping mechanism protecting the psyche from the actual reality of the situation. This is a natural reaction.
I’ve seen my fair share of middle-aged men who go to the local gym and do Arnold’s split in the hope to conquer insane heights. They really think that the plan will work… that they will acquire a magical physique that will somehow negate all the oppression and overall nastiness that life throws at you. They do their squats, deads and rows while consuming the right amount of powder protons. Yet the naturals among them look frozen in time.
Obviously, it’s all a lie. The power comes from the drugs rather than an over-hyped and hyper-intellectualized way of lifting weights. Changing splits will not turn you into a monster. You can copy the regime of any professional in the world, but in all cases, it will not add the slabs of meat to your frame that you expect.
2. The pros follow high-end diets engineered to build muscle and burn fat in the most efficient way possible.
People continue to pay for overpriced nutritional regimens. Many kids buy 50-dollar one-page diet plans from fitness models who copy & paste the same meal system to every “client”.
We love following instructions. Orders feel natural in a consumer society that requires you to read labels and comply. Adding another guideline which will allegedly lead us to the desired result seems like an attractive step to the average humanoid.
The sad truth is that the muscle heroes do not follow magical diets. Many cheat and consume junk food on regular basis. They pretend that they are insanely strict for the camera, but in the meantime, their diet rivals that of a rock star who does not know the difference between atoms and carbohydrates. Then, with the help of some “hoaxing”, they come up with a dieting strategy based on whatever study suits their marketing plan and sell it to the brahs trying to forge thicker muscular fibers.
3. Drugs are just the finishing touch.
According to the professors in the gym, drugs are not that powerful. Many geniuses in the muscle sector have produced articles diminishing the power of injections to basically nothing.
“Drugs? They are just the final 5%. All else comes from broccoli and muscle occlusion.”
Successful people often try to diminish the importance of factors they do not control such as genetics and drugs’ anabolism in order to calm down their egos and convince themselves and their followers that controllable elements such as hard work, proper planning and persistence is what got them to do the top.
I finished high-school with a guy whose parents are incredibly rich. They have a construction company that has built many buildings in the city. I would not be surprised if the assets of that company amount to billions. The guy himself is a decent genetic specimen. He is tall and somewhat handsome. He certainly isn’t Brad Pitt, but he has charisma and presence for days. If you are into dry jokes produced by rich kids, you could even say that he has a sense of humor.
Imagine that man trying to score. Whatever he tries will work for him. He would still experience rejections, but this is inevitable. For most of his existence, however, he will bath in attention.
If he writes a dating book, his advice will not work for average dudes because the force behind this guy’s love conquests is not “game” but rather the asset he represents himself. He has good genes, money and status. That is a backbone for success. Everything else is just peripheral behavior and details that hold as much importance as the color of your shoes…maybe even less.
Drugs, just like genes, have essential value. They are not the finishing touch. They are the damn engine regardless of what the mainstream says.
4. They are natural
The percentage of big guys on steroids is so high that one may conclude that virtually all popular muscle heroes are not natural. Yet they keep filling your head with “natty principles” and memes such as hard work and heavy lifting.
They have to do it because hope is the strongest fuel on which humans run. If there’s hope, people would do desperate things and believe the impossible.
This is especially true for young and/or unaware individuals. Experience rather than just age is required to understand some things in life. There are grown men who still believe in fairy tales. I see them everywhere I go. You can tell by looking at the way they walk in the mall. Their body movements reveal everything. They are not questioning the program. They just play the consumer and status game without carrying about anything else in the world.
People often present themselves as righteous. Some believe it honestly, but when it comes down to altering their actions and actually proving to the world that they are, they revert to attitude supporting the status quo.
Ethics professors will feel your heads with all kinds of dramatic dilemmas, but when it’s their turn to make an example, they won’t do anything because it’s all theatrics. Like an actor who does not share one single quality with the roles he plays, they show their true color.
The dudes who keep supporting the lies in the fitness industry are no different. When confronted with the truth they dismiss it as hate speech and hug the mainstream source of lies because it’s popular and earns them points in the eyes of others, especially women. Did you forget? Women do not like haters and conspiracy theorists unless they look like Brad Pitt.
I am almost sorry to inform you for the 1000th time, but the chances that your muscle hero is a pristine natty raindrop are basically zero at this point.
5. The champion would still be the champion even without the drugs.
Many roid users believe that the current champion would still be numero uno even if all drugs are removed from the equation. That’s actually wrong. It’s true that people with great genetics for muscle construction would still shine even without steroids, but the professors forget a variable called – reaction to drugs.
A man can have good genes and base for winning, but if his body cannot tolerate the drugs that he has to take in order to compete he wouldn’t be competitive. In other words, a natural champ may fail to remain at the top once the injections start.
Meanwhile, dudes with otherwise average structural genetics but with great organ resilience and good response to drugs may overtake the brahs whose bodies cannot tolerate anabolic pills.
6. Their training is perfect.
The number one explanation for one’s failure to build huge muscles like the pros is improper training and dieting. I already told you that the pros don’t follow strict diets most of the time. Their training isn’t perfect either. Most do not even have training logs and lift however they feel like throughout most of the season.
They fill your head with bro science theories such as pre-exhaustion and burn sets, but ultimately, they are simply coming up with nonsense which seems legit because the drugs make them big. In reality, their wisdom is no different than business advice coming from a trust fund kid who has never actually built anything in his life.
7. They have superhuman genetics.
The drugs fog the vision of many bodybuilders. They start to believe that they owe their musculature to some mythical gene combination. Yet their genetic make-up is not that special. Most are average men who inject.
There are many delusional permabulkers on steroids too. If they were to lose all the fat and cut the drug import, they would look shockingly small. Their insane genetics would go from hero to zero.
People are reluctant to attribute their success to factors out of one’s control. They want to believe that hard work is the only reason for their results.
8. They do it for health reasons.
According to the mainstream consciousness, the gym is a powerful purifier necessary for the maintenance of perfect health.
“If you are not healthy, just go to the gym, bro!”
Yet almost nobody except old people and those recovering from an injury do it for the health effect. The goal has always been external admiration and increase of one’s worth on the sexual market.
If this wasn’t the case, unhealthy elements such as steroids, diuretics and excessive heavy lifting would not be the norm.
9. They take low doses.
Some pinners are open about their use. Nevertheless, they still lie about the actual quantities of drugs they are taking.
“I am just on TRT, bro!”
In reality, many TRT warriors are cycling multiple compounds.
The motivation? To downplay the importance of chemistry in the muscle construction process.
Nothing Will Ever Change
Humanoids spend most of their lives thinking that constant change is happening.
My boss once said – “We live in a world that constantly changes.” Yet when I looked at him and his entire slave factory, excuse me, company, nothing had changed for the past 10 years – the office had not been upgraded; the salaries were the same apart from minuscule 1-5% increases; the work was similar; his attitude was just as nasty; the policy and growth strategy of the firm were identical to before; his current car was as expensive as the previous one…
Nothing had fundamentally evolved and yet he was saying that the world is constantly renewing itself.
We mistake being busy with progressing. When you are busy, there’s a lot happening, but how much of it makes a difference in the grand scheme of things? People are busy all the time and yet nothing changes.
Social media and other outlets feeding our short attention spans and abusing the “highlight effect” tell us that we live in a world where something new and exciting is happening every day, but this is not the case.
We live in TV series. The episode is different, but the skeleton is the same. 99% of the TV series that you are ever going to watch are technically repeating the same episode over and over again. You just can’t see it because you don’t want to see it. For instance, the popular police films are basically interchangeable. Something bad happens, and the good guys fix it by following the evidence.
Change? Not really. The cars are still polluting the air. The factories producing phones are still banging. The slaves are still pulling the chains. The brainwashing is still going on.
Of course, there are cultural shifts that occur such as feminism, but ultimately, the underlying principles remain.
The same goes for bodybuilding. A movement may gain power and influence the daily events (e.g., 5×5), but the overall structure of the mechanism is engraved.
A real change will not come, my friends.
Great article, especially the bit about life staying the same. Today I watched an interview with ex-Olympian Michael Johnson, taking about his recovery from a stroke.
Made me think that if one of the fittest guys in the world can suffer a stroke, then what is the incremental benefit of doing lots of exercise above keeping off excess fat.
10. Their work ethic is insane.
Often we hear about their superhuman workouts. People then say “well do you train as hard, for so long, with such intensity and frequency”
These sheep forget one crucial factor. If I or any other long term natural bodybuilder was on the same amount of drugs as these guys (and gals) are on and had responsive genetics for drugs, I would be able to train like them too without burning out (its not them, its the drugs).
Take the drugs away, and their so called ‘work ethic’ will go aswell. When I was a young teenager, I would spend up to 3 hours training, its not that difficult. The problem is you burn out super fast as a natural and your workouts become lethargic.
This lie always used to annoy me once I new the truth.
Brett good point, though there were, and probably are, enhanced BB’s that trained with crazy insanity and frequency when they were natural and even more so when they juiced (Steve Michalik is the first example that comes to mind).
But as it relates to the sphere of your typical wannabee non-pro who juices for girls and that beach look, your analysis is 100% spot on. In fact, I’ll go a step further: Most of these juiced posers can’t even handle a sensible training and diet program, especially when off of the drugs. I can’t tell you how many juice monkeys I’ve known who quit altogether once they had to go off (for whatever reason)…they never learned how to train and nothing seems to work anymore. Yes you have leeway once you’re on gear with your diet, and can get away with half ass pump exercises with no real intensity, but they quickly realize that they can’t cut the pain and trouble of training natural once the steroids leave the body. Plus they are getting smaller and weaker by the day which is so psychologically crippling and demotivating.
As one industry insider said of the topic, the mentality becomes, “Why even bother training if I’m not on?”
I’m not against steroids, but I am of the mentality that if you’re going to dabble you have to earn the right with years in the trenches first. That way, if you even do indulge and go off you will at least have a solid base that you built previously and know how to train and maintain it.
FYI: Some 20+ year naturals who eventually juiced say that once they quit they were even able to hold on to some of those gains despite not returning to the needle again. I’m inclined to believe them based on my experience, because they built that aforementioned foundation, plus they love to train and actually enjoy the active lifestyle, unlike the results only oriented pinners who began training and juicing on the same day.
“Some 20+ year naturals who eventually juiced say that once they quit they were even able to hold on to some of those gains despite not returning to the needle again”
I’ve long wondered if what might be termed “short-cutting to genetic mass max via supraphysiological dosing” might account for most or even all of this?
I realize that long-term steroid usage does permanently increase the number of satellite cells in some users to some degree; meaning, some of that “even-after-quitting-steroids” may be attributed to that.
However, I wonder if the vast majority of users who hold on to some mass after quitting may do so for the following reason: they began using steroids before they’d maxxed out their natural genetic potential.
It commonly requires at least three consecutive years of consistent progressive training-and-eating-correctly to max natural genetic potential.
But if, for example, someone trained for a year (getting first-year gains) then began using steroids in the second year, for a couple years, the steroids would typically add mass above their natural max. When they quit steroids, their muscle mass would decrease, of course — BUT, only decrease to the point of their natural muscle mass max. Their natural testosterone would enable them to carry that natural max.
In otherwords, they’d end up with the mass they’d naturally built anyway if they’d stayed drug-free bodybuilding for three years. The steroids had short-cut them to and then above their natural mass max; but once the steroids were discontinued, they’d be able to hold their natural mass max once their mass decreased to that natural genetic point.
From their perspective, they did end up with more mass than they had at the end of their first drug-free year before they began steroids. They’d easily mistake it for “kept steroid gains” when actually it was the same mass max they’d have eventually developed anyway if they’d never used steroids.
What I think is so frustrating, is that from the moment you confront them, you will become a bad person in their eyes and a hater in the eyes of some others. This means that you never can talk in a general audience about the most important factor: AAS. This means they will always see you as a hater, while you just want to be serious and talk about the truth.
And then at the same time. Some of these athletes are so nice and friendly. And have good intentions …. it’s best to avoid the topic. The lie is to defend themselfes. Sometimes I don’t know what to think about it.
So are you saying that 5×5 three times a week is useless for us natties?
If you expect some Regg Park level of gains, then yes. It is useless.
I used to work out at the Gold’s Gym in Las Vegas that Mr. Olympia Jay Cutler trained at when he was winning those titles. I was surprised at how easy his workouts were compared to mine. He was twice my size using roughly the same weights for less reps and sets but he did have his coach (drug dealer) with him all the time. These guys are nothing without drugs just look at the pics in this article of Dillet.
Bro you just don’t have the same mind muscle connection he has!
Bro your just a straight HATER!
“He is not a juicer he..”
1) Works F**** hard bro!
2) been at it 40 years (only 35 years old)
3) An insane natural muscle
4) He eats 300g of protein a day.
5) he does “Reverse pyramids, Hypotrophy, single, tripples relax and clench set…some kind of B*S* training method
6) It’s rumoured his day was Hercules
7) He takes **** creatine end of!
8) F88 you ..you are a hater. Anyone that looks like a freak is a steroid user in your book..
9) He said h’e natural…that’s good enough for me
I actually use enahncement and the observation here is rather reductive in that there is more than one factor involved, In short this is emblematic of the Single Factor Fallacy. You have to reach your full poettial first or gear will work but will not be all that aesthetically pleasing. And even then genetics are a factor in that androgenic receptors respond to steroids differently with each individual. Moreover there as things such as Insulin, HGH, IGF. SARMs and peptides also in play but still the effectivenesss of all of these substances varies for reasons stated above. Enhancement is just that enhancement. There has to be a base to begin with, For myslef I run cycles and maintain with SARMs and Peptides in between. But in Post Postmodern Culture, finding a specific”there” as this article suggests is far removed from “The Real”.
TruthSeeker has previously discussed all of your points in this and his other posts. As he and most of us who’ve been bodybuilding for at least three or four years (I’m age 62 and have been bodybuilding for forty-six years) realize, years of hard work, intelligent progressive training, consistency in training and eating, genetics (including but not only basic skeletal structure, muscle insertions and muscle belly lengths, fiber type preponderance, quantity, and distribution, metabolic efficiency, neural efficiency, number of receptors, CAT repeat, myostatin level, and aromatising tendency), and what might be termed “responsiveness to AAS” genetics all affect “The Real”.
However, “PostModern Culture” notwithstanding, the one variable separating PED users with outstanding physiques from the vast majority of us (including PED users with mediocre physiques) is reducible to just that: PEDs.
AAS, HGH, insulin, anti-aromatising agents, etcetera are ultimately what produce the type of physique glamorized in media.
By the way…I’m NOT anti-PEDs, not at all. I hold that all adults ought to be free to legally obtain and use AAS and other enhancers if they choose.
I said Post Postmodern not Postmodern Culture as that historical moment ended about a decade ago. The Post Postmodern is when the fragmentation of “reality” was replaced by “the object” which is precisely when bodybuilding moves from the margins to the center of Culture. Those of us in the sport turn our bodies into objects. The specifc term is Object Oriented Ontology. I’m 51 and have been in and out of the sport (children can do that). And see exogenous substances as simply tools. With or without enhancement the individual can no just sit on his/her couch and eat pizza I guess what I find most problematic here is the implicit hierarchy constructed when if (as you say) it is a matter of choice, one choice should not be privileged over another. At the root of it all I suspect is some sort of physical iteration of The Protestant Work Ethic,
I apologize, I did misread your “Post PostModernism” as “PostModernism”.
Nevertheless, ironically ( PostModern pun intended, yep) you apparently miss the point here: being , the impact on many caused by the ignorance, misunderstanding, self-deception, and outright dishonesty about the primacy of PEDs for producing the idealized Object, the physique popularly glamorized in media.
That impact amounts to the misinformation and even disinformation, “the glamorized physique IS achieved primarily by The Protestant Work Ethic.”
The variables of work ethic, genetics, and informed training, alone or in any combination, certainly do account for achieving the glamorized Object, but secondarily. Ultimately, that Object is primarily produced by PED’s. PED’s are not merely A tool, but are THE primary tool necessary for achieving that Object.
The point here is not choice. Adults who choose PEDs and adults who choose lifelong PED-free don’t exist in any hierarchy of “one is better than the other”. I see each choice as equally valid.
Rather, the point is, “What is primary for achieving the glamorized Object?” Any explanation which relegates PEDs to any place except primary is an erroneous if not deceptive narrative. That misinformation and disinformation skews the perceptions of those novice and/or naive to bodybuilding concerning what’s necessary to achieve the popularly-glamorized Object
By the way…I have been using prescription TRT, 100 mg/week of Test Cyp, for the past four years, since I turned age 58. As I mentioned in my previous post, I’m not at all nor ever have been anti-PEDs.
curious you guys compare the protestant work ethic with the “anything is archiavable if you work hard, other variables dont count” kind of mentallity that pemeates bodybuilding pipe-dreams seekers. The kind of guy who believes that those bodies are archievables without PED is the same kind of guy who believes all non-milloinares are lazy, its the kind of person who will label you as a hater and a sloth if you tell him to take into account many other variables, like the fact that some humanoids have to work all day just to make ends meet. in their their view the final result is a sign of virtue, and their are incapable of thinking that maybe the final result it’s not a sign of virtue, but as truthseeker once said, nobody likes to hear that the emperor wears no clothes, in fact its painful to see that the emperor is naked.
At the risk of adopting overly academic discourse, the reason that the “object” achieves primacy in Culture is that it replaces “selfhood”. There is no glamorization per se as that would suggest some sort of subjectivity that is non existent. The body as object becomes an articulatory surface upon which experience is inscribed and thus a new form of “being” is constructed by a consciousness which is not a “self”. PEDs indeed are a tool to construct this new entity (I know — poor choice of words). Were it not steroids there would be something else in their place to serve this sociophysical function. But it not only limited to that. The rise of piercings and tattoos in Culture serve the very same function — the construction of being via self inscription. My problem with the essay from which this exchange arose is the quasi reactionary subtext of a narrator longing for selfhood/identity which is a Cultural Impossibility.
Simply put the term glamorization requires a subjectivity that no longer exists. The object has replaced it. PEDs are a tool to construct being in the absence of a “self” via self inscription. Piercings and tattoos are also emblematic of the same sociophysical function. And the narrative constructed here appears a reactionary response to Contemporary Culture,
“Were it not steroids there would be something else in their place to serve this sociophysical function. But it not only limited to that. The rise of piercings and tattoos in Culture serve the very same function — the construction of being via self inscription. My problem with the essay from which this exchange arose is the quasi reactionary subtext of a narrator longing for selfhood/identity which is a Cultural Impossibility.”
Thanks for clarifying your problem with his essay. I now understand what your point was.
I’ll leave discussion of underlying and overlying issues to venues outside the immediate focus of this thread.
Its impossible for any man to reach there full potential in bodybuilding if they are on steroids or not if you would like me to explain why I am happy too ?
TruthSeeker,what are your thoughts on SARMS? Results,side effects,keeping gains,etc…
Btw, I like reading your blog and Hater’s Synthesis is great.
SARMs are basically steroids but with less research behind them.
SARMS are Selective Androgenic Receptor Modulators and differ greatly from steroids in that they specifically affect androgenic receptors. They are about as well researched as steroids were when first used by “Golden Age Bodybuilders”. And only one S23 completely shuts down testosterone production. Others suppress it to varying degrees.
What are you trying to say?
If they behave so similarly to steroids, they are basically steroids.
why in training focus 2, you told that are necessary at least 4 sets for hypertrophy?
where did you find this number?
There isn’t a specific number. It’s a guideline.
But they don’t act like steroids. steroids travel throughout the body to the receptors, . SARMs go only to the receptors. Historically that’s why they were created. During the AIDS Crisis patient were being administered steroids and they were killing them. The “Selective” in the acronym SARMs comes from the fact that they do no cause organic damage. The CAN be used to build muscle but the entire reason for there existence is to preserve it. This is why while they can be used to build they are most effective between cycles. Molecularly the difference is glaring. A SARM looks absolutely nothing like a testosterone molecule. And the effect on muscle fiber is different as well. A SARM will provide fullness but not the kind of graininess one can get from a steroid and with the exception of S23 most do not cause vascularity and only RAD140 causes hardness. Just because something enhances muscle does not make it a steroid anymore than any vehicle with wheels is a car.
I am going to assume, given your alias and your, unique, perspective on bodybuilding and all things “fitness,” that you have a unique level of thinking on a number of other topics as well. Actually, I know you do, as you have proven so in little glimpses when connecting “fitness” and bodybuilding with other concepts and life aspects in some of your work. What Im trying to get at is, these are just tiny aspects of this, gargantuan rabbit hole, so to speak, and I for one one would love to hear what you have to say about other topics as well. Have you ever considered/been open to that? Philosophical, analytical, “political,” etc. topics outside the bodybuilding realm?
Truth Seeker for the purposes of hypertrophy only not strength, How many reps per set is best 10, 12 or 15? Thanks.
And, if it is only a gideline, why 4 sets and not 3 or 5?
I think that give specific number is without sense..
As an age 62-year-old who’s been bodybuilding for forty-six years since beginning at age sixteen, I’ll offer my opinion, based on my over forty-years of PED-free experience, observation, and research:
Quantities of volume (how many sets and how many reps, not only per-exercise but also per-muscle group and per-total workout), frequency (how many times a muscle group and/or the entire body is worked every given number of days) and even intensity (how often a muscle group and/or the entire body is worked to near-maximum, to moderate, or to relatively easy-on-the-central-nervous-system stress) is ultimately and inevitably a matter of “I find this quantity is both productive (you gradually build more muscle) and sustainable (you are able to continue for at least three consecutive years without burning out physically and psychologically) for me.”
In otherwords, you have to figure out “how many” serves well enough for you.
Empirically, PED-free guys with average muscle-building genetics have found 3 to 5 sets, in a rep range of 6 to 15, is productive and sustainable. (I haven’t read NATTY’s “Training Focus” ebooks, by the way) for hypertrophy. I say, empirically, because that’s what’s worked for the majority of average PED-free guys for the past 75 years (although, there is some science supporting this too, but, the science isn’t conclusive at this point in research, despite what any marketeer might claim in order to peddle his program to you).
For one person, that might end up being 3 sets of 10…for another 4 sets done 12, 10, 8, 6…for yet another, 5 sets of 8… Etcetera. (My sweet spot, as a guy with BELOW-average muscle genetics, during my initial three consecutive years — which, by the way, is the period during which the average drug-free guy will build 85-90% of the muscle his genetics allow him to carry naturally — was 5 sets of 7 per muscle group done twice in each seven days). What each person eventually settles on depends on their genetics, including their psychological genetics. Remember, your program has to be productive AND long-term sustainable.
Within those ranges of sets and reps, the goal is to gradually progress in strength as possible. “Getting stronger” is necessary for hypertrophy (to a point, which again depending on genetics. Developing the maximum muscle mass your genes allow does require getting relatively stronger, but once you reach your maximum hypertrophy, it’s possible to continue getting stronger although that won’t add any more muscle). If you settle on, say, 4 sets of 8, with a specific poundage, then one of various ways to build strength is to seek to gradually add reps until you’re finally doing, say, 4 sets of 12 reps with that poundage, then to increase the poundage and return to 4 sets of 8 using the higher poundage. And then, repeat the cycle until you’re back to 4 sets of 12 reps again. That’s A way to progress in strength, not at all the only way.
And, whatever quantity you settle on as a start point, you’re not locked in to forever. If you’re new to weighttraining, I’d advise sticking to your initial program at least six months…but, otherwise, after six weeks, three months, six months, etcetera, on one quantity, you can shift to a different quantity IF you want. Or, not. For certain psychological genetics, variation is more important for motivation; I’m the type who doesn’t ever get bored doing the same ol’ program and can keep it for literally years, but others need variety else they lose interest. Just, try not to shift too frequently — the body needs a few weeks to adjust to and progress on any program. Changing too often too soon is usually counterproductive for most guys, despite them insisting otherwise.
I realize I’ve crammed much in this post, and even then have not thoroughly explained some aspects, so…feel free to ask.
The biochemistry of SARMS in relationship to steroids is a very similar metabolic action. There is no “time release” as there is no true selective environment. This article was extremely well written and magnificently provocative. I am and always be against the stupidity and finality of DRUG ABUSE!
So you’re actually saying that even if an asteroid hit the Earth nothing would change? Your boss and these Steroid user would still spread their bullshit? I don’t know what you call change maybe you expect a better world for everyone where everything is true but it’s not that change isn’t happening things stay the same cause people are stupid! The world is changing like the Muslims are starting to take over! If Muslims taking over isn’t the World Changing than I don’t know what changing might be according to you!
I assume the “Dr.” is not followed by an MD in that there is no substantiation given to the claims that a SARM has a “similar metabolic action”. First off SARMs vary among themselves to the degree in which they bond to the androgenic receptors so even if your assertion of similarity was true it would be in varying degrees in that there is now a veritable plethora of SARMs. The one which bonds most effectively to date is S23 which is a variation on S4. Your lack of specificity troubles me here in that you strike an authoritative pose but give absolutely no indication of any knowledge on the topic and speak in the most broadest of terms possible. Drug abuse may indeed be stupid but so is ungrounded pretentiousness.
Great article of truth to the young and inexperience masses. Sadly, the state of arrogance and gullibility blemishes those with real achievements. I’m going to be 60 next week. When I was 15 I started exercising, then serious progressive weight training due to my skinny thin boned, glass-back nerd-dom (you know, the kid who used to get beat up and called “gay” due to his smarts, manners and lack of physical prowess. Well, that kid went from 133 lb. to 195 in less than two years. No drugs, hardly any supplements (protein powders and weight gain powders gave us gas); just lots of food and basic exercises, with the barbell squat as our mainstay. Oh, and chins. We thrived on the making the hardest exercises increase. And forced ourselves to go to bed early. Heck, no girl no matter how sexy could keep us awake past 10 PM! There’s no other way. It worked, even I became transformed physically (and mentally too! – I kinda got a little cocky. Hey it’s wild when you’re young and dumb and full of youth and natural testosterone. I’m six foot one, going to be 6 decades old, and still train regularly. I’m not 210 pounds with a 32 inch waist and 50 inch chest and 17 inch arms anymore, but a pretty good specimen at 190 lb., 46 inch chest, 16 and a quarter arms and still have a 32 inch waist. My low back, as x-rays show, is older but actually stronger as a result of 40 years of proper weight training. PS: I learned at a young age that progression was key, and that the secret was simply to put more effort into less work on a less fewquent basis. Like, duh. I laugh and cry at the same time when I see these kid and ill informed people blindly doing shit that they saw their favorite opinion leader brag about or spew as actual exercise knowledge. Just like fake news and the spineless bozos who only know what is put right at their eye level.
I’m age 63 this year, been at the iron for over forty-six years since beginning at age 16 in 1972.
I did essentially what you describe, starting as a skinny-fat class valedictorian, with thin-diameter bones and short muscle-bellies, at 145 lbs at 5’8″ . At my peak at age 22, after five consecutive years of progressive training, I was 176 lbs with 15.625″ arms and a 31″ waist. Still have that lean waist and visible abs at 160 lbs with 14.5″ arms.
Free-weight squats, pull-ups, overhead dumbbell presses, rows, dips, incline presses, deadlifts, and incline curls were and remain my core exercises (except incline presses, which my job-injured shoulders no longer tolerate).
However…y’know….young guys today are no different than we were when we were age 15 to 21. We selectively (or conveniently) forget that OUR parents and grandparents back then called us “lazy”, “disrespectful”, “entitled”, “arrogant”, “naive”, “ignorant”, and “ridiculous” when we were that age. And, the bodybuilding information situation we were in at that age was no different in essence than today’s.
When we began, most of knew only what we read in the Weider, Lurie, Hoffman, and Rader magazines published in the 1970s. As today, much of the claimed training and nutritional advice then was exaggerated, outright fabricated, erroneous, conflicting, and/or applicable to genetic elites and/or anabolic steroid users, not to the average-gened PED-free guy. We too followed the “leaders” of that bodybuilding era without realizing many of them were wrong if not outright opportunists using our gullibility to sell magazines, training books, and their useless supplements.
Sure, as we continued, we each learned what worked in reality, and, what worked particularly for ourselves (progressive overload being the common key), but that came through experience of years — we didn’t know nor were even aware what we didn’t know for awhile, and we too parroted faulty ideas for awhile which we later discarded.
So…naw…we weren’t any better at that age than young guys are today. Just, decades later, we tend to remember our pasts through short- and selective memory, so it’s a glossier, more-idealized version of what it actually was.