Vegan Gains – a Natural Vegan Bodybuilder Or a Steroid User?

| by Truth Seeker |

”Vegan Gains” is the name of a popular YouTube channel promoting plant-eating as the best investment you can make for the betterment of your health and conscience. Since the guy behind the videos has a pretty decent physique and likes to participate in as much YouTube battles as possible, he has attracted the attention of many people looking to build an ”aesthetic physique”.

But can you have his muscle mass and leanness without selling your glutes to the devil?

At first, I was unable to find the actual body stats of Vegan Gains and decided to just analyze some photos instead. It became obvious to me that most of his pictures are taken from favorable angles in order to hide the weak muscle groups and push forward the strong ones. Additionally, the guy disappears in videos and has the depleted natty look.

In the photo below, you can see Vegan Gains next to LexFitness. Obviously, Vegan Gains looks like a deflated balloon compared to Lex. This and other photos lead me to the conclusion that there is a high chance that Mr.Beans is actually one of the few naturals bodybuilders on YouTube.


Another important factor to consider is that he is pretty much all arms, or should I say all biceps.

If you try to remove his biceps from the photo, you will realize that he is not that big. I guess this is one of the reasons the kid is always trying to put his guns in your face. They have to be his ”best muscle”.

After asking the people who have liked’s Facebook page for help, I found a video interview with Vegan Gains where it is revealed that he has the following body stats:

Height: 6’3”–190.5cm
Weight: 180-185lbs/81.8-84kg
Body fat: unspecified (probably around 9-12%)

You check the video above for yourself. He lists his stats at about 4:10.

Vegan Gains’ stats are actually pretty realistic for his height. In NattyOrNot’s guide for natties, which has been correct many times, you can see that a 6’3” tall natural bodybuilder with insane genetics could have a maximum weight of about 203lbs.

However, don’t forget that the guide is for the elite of the elite, or in simple words – the freaks. I don’t believe regular people can get there naturally.

Where are you traps, bro?

Another observation that needs to be pointed out is that Vegan Gains has a rather weak trap and neck development – a rarity among juicers. We all know that your traps and shoulders blow up when you take steroids. I am not saying that this is true for everybody, but in 99% of the cases, steroid users don’t have underdeveloped traps in relation to their arms.

Angles, smoke and mirrors

At the end of the day, most of Vegan Gains’ photos are smoke and mirrors. He is using the classic natty techniques to make yourself bigger – pump, Photoshop, lighting, sharpening…etc.


Do you think that Vegan Gains is an immoral person because of the crazy stuff he says?

I wasn’t paying attention to Vegan Gains until I received an email from a reader talking about an escalating YouTube drama. It turned out that Vegan Gains supposedly wanted to film the last minutes of his grandfather and upload the video on YouTube to showcase what animal products do to you.

While this is incredibly stupid in general, I think that it’s a bluff meant to get more views. We all know that people love outrageous drama. That’s why the celebrity gossip magazines get so much love from the crowd. I would not be surprised if Vegan Gains was trolling the whole YouTube fitness circle jerk.

Does this make him immoral? Yes, because of the poorly chosen topic.

Vegan Gains has a lot of research in his videos. Do you think he is always right?

There are so many studies these days that you can always find one that supports your belief.

Think about it! Some researchers are backing climate change (global warming) while others don’t. I prefer to believe the latter. Why? Because the supporters of global warming are most likely trying to push the agenda simply to collect more revenue from taxes.

Consequently, you can’t always treat research as concrete evidence. In order for it to be of any value, it has to be made by people who are independent and knowledgeable, which is something that cannot be said about the big statistical institutes. Those guys can easily be bought.

In conclusion

The data suggests that there is a very high chance that this dude is natural.

By the way, I want you to consider the following. Last year I wrote an article on Omar Isuf and at the time he was 5’9″-175cm@182lbs – 82kg. Vegan Gains is about the same weight at 6’3” (6 inches taller). Weird, isn’t it?

I gave Omar a 2.4 out of 5 probability of being natty. I give Vegan Gains 4.5 out of 5.

No spam. Unsubscribe at any time.


    1. Visc

      Fuck your “scientific research” and fuck Wikipedia.

      1. Bob

        1. Using a computer
        2. Saying “fuck science”

        Pick one

    2. mARK sT.pIERRE


      1. Heath Watts

        Wikipedia is a fine place to start. The references generally lead to good information. Try

        Science is not up for debate. It’s not a popularity contest.

        Good luck.

        1. Heath Watts

          That should have read that science is not up for debate by laymen. We scientists debate our science with each other, but debating our respective science fields with laypeople is as useful as a heart surgeon debating bypass techniques with a layperson.

  1. Elliott

    Jac you should look at both sides before you post at biased data like the information on Wikipedia as they actively block anything correcting the dated man made global warming data. It’s not black and white far from it. Randell Carlson will set you straight.

  2. jac

    I just wanted to point out that climate change is NOT a topic where “everyone has to decide what they believe”.
    One side is backed by overwhelming and independent scientific evidence, the other one is a conspiracy theory that’s mostly being put forward by the fossil fuel industry and its likes. Everyone should be aware of that. If the credibility of one position is as questionable as in this case, it’s not okay to use it in a different context as an example of a thing where everybody should make up their own mind.

  3. You're a moron

    Where did the climate change come from LOL are you mental?

  4. rth

    Lmao this articles Q and A is so stupid I will never take this site seriously.

  5. Gladiator


    I respect your research and level of comprehension overall but I choose to disagree on the chances you have given those two mentioned above based on my own experience and training for the last 51 years.

    I give Omar a 0 out of 5 for being natty and Vegan Gains maybe a 4.9 out of 5. Just my two cents.

    You are on the dot regarding most of your conclusions and I admire your honesty and guts in not giving in to online detractors.

    Keep up the good work.

  6. Jg

    As soon as this guy said he doesn’t acknowledge climate change I clocked out. You’re a joke. Every relevant scientific study has found it is real and it is already causing mass migration around the world. No scientist is making money from “revenue and taxes” associated with curbing climate change lmao

    1. trev

      I’ve been around long enough to live through the hysteria that we were going to start another ice age, then global warming and now the vague climate change which you can pigeon hole virtually any weather anomaly into. There’s plenty of money to be made in climate change as non profits are very well funded. My town just went through the coldest and longest winter it’s had in 20 years. Weather changes, calling it climate change is unscientific and falls outside the realm of science which is supposed to be able to make predictions based on a theory. Climate change most definitely is an agenda with well funded advocates and even oil companies fund climate change research. The hysterical posts here just confirm my suspicions that the average person is not very well read and is highly suggestible to the programming that comes from the media.

      More money should be focused on pollution and cleaning up the oceans and lakes and stop making cheap crap in china that ends up in landfills after a year.

      1. Diddy

        Why?…because it may cause problems to the earth?…such as climate change.

      2. Heath Watts

        You’ve “been around long enough”. Well, i’m sold. You’ve lived for a few years vs. thousands of peer-reviewed papers and a massive amount of data that shows with high probability that mean global temperature is increasing and that humans have caused this warming. I’d love to hear your wisdom about finding exact exchange and correlation for density functional theory. I’m sure that you’ve “been around long enough” to have understood and solved that issue as well. You do not know the difference between climate and weather. Please, consult a dictionary.

        If you want to clean up and stop polluters, then please vote against politicians who are funded by the energy, mining, and other polluting industries, which lobby to weaken or end environmental regulations. Also, vote for pro-science politicians, so that we can hire more scientists to do the work that you’re suggesting.

        1. George Ra

          Nope your supposed pear refused papers watts. Again we dont deny climate change WE DENY that your FUNDING and your idears of stopping it IS NOT helping the climate and IT IS helping your bank accounts.

          Your particle conspiracy theories failed Watts pelase consult a school. It is a proven fact that many of your ‘Papers’ Keep changing and going back on their word and blatantly lying on polar ice caps.

          Why? Because your support of green peace is funding oil companies and when we proposed nuclear stations you started crying and spazzing the floor. The pro science scientists your talking about are pro propoganda and money and conspiracy theories and pro communism.

          The work we are suggesting is not supported by your ‘comrades’

          1. George Ra is a Moron

            You can barely put together a single coherent sentence and you think people should trust your views on a complex scientific topic. Genuinely hilarious. Maybe try finishing second grade and then try this again?

  7. SahDuh

    LMAO this idiot says it’s stupid to back your claims with research because, “Fuck research, There is so much of it these days that you can always find one that supports your belief.”! You’re pathetically moronic. How the fuck does one make a claim without providing scientific evidence? It’s all you can do. With that thought process, people like you and Scott Mendelson get rekt by Vegan Gains every time. You’ll sit in front of a camera, or behind or keyboard and spout off nonsense with nothing to back it up besides a token of anecdotal evidence, and think you’re winning because research is pointless. The very computer you type on, or the camera you use, is a product of research. God you are a fucking idiot.

  8. Tim

    I have expensively studied science in both undergraduate and graduate programs at Rutgers university and human-caused climate change is as Strong a fact as evolution and gravity. I don’t expect you to read every journal article ever published but stop getting any science from politicians.

  9. Darwin

    People should just state there opinions on climate change and evolution right at the start of any opinion piece so that we know if they have an ounce of rational thought. jebus made the earth and the animals and the smoke from my truck goes up into the sky where I can’t see it. That’s the whole truth and I have full knowledge of the planet and the universe and no big science shill is going to convince me otherwise!

  10. Jepa

    Try to build muscles on a Vegan diet … its an other game … if you consume animal Protein you can archive vegan gains body … but with a vegan diet … almost impossible. I guess he has taken some roids in the past … also he is close to john venus … its unlikely that he has never taken some stuff with his fake natty friends

  11. nijjerlover

    steroids are cool fukl u kids

  12. Ty

    Didn’t this guy tell in one of his video’s that he used to taken roids (with pictures), but is clean now?

  13. nilbog

    Lmao at these gullible soyboys in the comments.

  14. Heath Watts

    Based on this blog, it seems that you’re a climate change denier. Do you deny germ theory and evolutionary biology as well? Both of those areas of research depend on grant money, which comes from taxes. Science costs money.

    If you’re concerned about taxes, you should know that we tax payers give large sums of money to the oil companies each year, for example, see:
    In turn, the oil companies spend money to spread misinformation about climate change and to insure that they will continue to get tax money from us.

    There is no disagreement in the science community about whether climate change is happening or whether the current trends are caused by humans. Those who spread misinformation about climate science have plenty to gain. If we actually did something about climate change, we could create jobs and prevent or lessen the extent of upcoming climate catastrophes. However, we would need to stop giving the ultra-profitable oil companies our tax money, and divert that money to something that does not continue to perpetuate climate change (e.g., solar, wind, nuclear).

    You are likely not a trained climatologist and neither am I, but if you choose to accept the opinions of other non-climatologists (oil company executives, GOP representatives, untrained bloggers) who are denying science to boost their profits, then why accept the evidence of experts in any field?

    At this point with the evidence that science has produced, denying climate research evidence doesn’t make one look like a skeptic, it makes one look like someone who is continuing to be fooled by the oil companies.

    About me: I have a PhD in geochemistry and I use quantum chemistry to study, among other areas, how potentially toxic elements such as lead and cadmium interact with mineral surfaces. I collaborate with experimental chemists, geoscientists, biologists, and physicists regularly. Our goal is to determine how metals adsorb (stick) to minerals and to develop mineral surfaces that remove potentially hazardous chemicals from the environment more effectively than naturally-occurring minerals do. All of this work is funded by tax money.

  15. Dude

    ‘a trained climatologist?” Ha! Ok, sport. Anyone who refers to himself as such knows nothing about science.

    Climate change exists? No kidding. Climate has always changed, and the history of humanity is adapting to those changes over time, not the other way around. (No, I don’t mean weather, genius; I mean climate. There is no “normal” climate and no “normal” temperature.) The real questions are (1) how much a change are we really talking (climate “models” have been absurdly inaccurate), (2) whether climate change is actually anthropogenic or whether carbon emissions raise temperatures (particularly given that higher temperatures raise carbon levels leading to an obvious chicken and egg problem), (3) what if anything, humans can do about it, (4) what is the cost-benefit calculus of such measures.

    If any of the people who claim to be serious about carbon emissions really were, they would do the following two things: (1) discourage Third World immigration to the First World, where their carbon footprint increases exponentially and (2) advocate for radical birth control in places like sub-Saharan Africa where the population has been exploding because, after all, the very theory of anthropogenic climate change is based on the idea that the existence of carbon-based life forms itself is the problem, not merely the use of fossil fuels. When climate change alarmists start advocating these two things, then you’ll know they’re actually serious. And, yes, Virginia, there’s a boatload of cash to be made from the climate change/government-sponsored green energy biz. Thinking that you get your money from the government or an NGO means you don’t have an axe to grind is laughable.

  16. Heath Watts

    You might not have understood my comment about a trained climatologist. I meant someone with the credentials to study and understand science at a high level and to apply their knowledge to climatology, that is, someone with a PhD and experience in a relevant field.

    I suggest you look here for the answers to your often-posed, but false opinions about climate change. Currently, you’re simply parroting oil company/Fox News propaganda. People might take your arguments seriously if you understood a bit more about the science and if you could come up with an original argument, unlike those you’ve posted here, in order to show that you have 1.) thought more deeply about the subject and 2.) still have doubts about climatology research based on your deep knowledge of the subject. Therefore, spending quality time at the Real Climate website would benefit you immensely.

    If you truly want to have a valid opinion about climate change, I suggest that you earn a PhD in a relevant field, work as a postdoc for a few years, and then go into an academic, private, or government-funded position where you can do research that will provide real evidence about climate change. Until then, you’re acting as a useful idiot for the oil companies. If you choose not to earn your PhD in a relevant field and contribute some useful evidence to the field, then your opinions about climate change are as relevant as an amateurs opinions about quantum mechanics, that is, not valuable.

    The dressing down that I’ve given you here should be given to every climatology, evolutionary biology, and immunology denier frequently and publicly. Denying scientific evidence is not just stupid, it’s dangerous. I won’t be replying to your subsequent messages, because what you wrote was incorrect and does not require a dialog, but good luck to you. I hope that you will be one of the few science deniers who succeeds in ending your ignorance.

    1. George Ra

      1. You gave no proof of fox news propoganda
      2. You have addmited to being a communist
      3. You never actually gave sourcing for your claims
      4. Sourcing from someone with a PHD does not mean they are correct

      What you given proved nothing. It did not proof that your communist temper tantrums and false articles that kept contridicting each other are a soloution to climate change. What it does prove is that your lies is about money.

      Thats all you will ever amount to.
      A factless money grubber.
      You did not provide evidence.
      Your igorance does remain.
      You are incorrect.
      You will not be replying because you cant.
      You have been debunked.

      We deny your communist CNN propoganda. Not scientists. Keep denying science for money and far left poltics it isnt working. Claiming that is science is dangerous. It is stupid.

  17. Heath Watts

    Where have I admitted to being a commuist? Besides, what is a “communist”? What decade is this? Please fax the information to me. Ha!

    No, one PhD does not make the evidence sound. However, evidence amassed by thousands of PhD scientists over the past several decades with no evidence-based counter evidence appearing does make an argument sound.

    Please reread my post, learn how the scientific method works, and stop listening to those who make a lot of money by lying to you (i.e., the oil companies, the politicians who the oil companies own, and the media sources who spread oil company propaganda.)

    Evidence for climate change has been around since the late 1970s, By the late 1980s, the science all pointed to humans being the cause of the warming trend. CNN had nothing to do with it.

    Why would I chose to have CNN be my source of information about science, when I have access to the scientific literature and scientists who study climate change? I don’t have cable TV and I don’t watch CNN, but thanks for your concern.

    If you want evidence for climate change and that humans are causing it, please visit Otherwise, sit back and watch human extinction unfold. Your children will not remember you fondly.

    Finally, if you want to debate another field of science from you position of ignorance, let’s debate my field. I use quantum chemisty calculations to better understand how minerals interact with metals with the goal of developing methods for removing potentially poisonous metals from the environment at waste sites. The theory that I use is called density funcational theory (DFT); it works quite well, but it has some limitations. Because you are confident that you know more than the thousands of sicentists who study climate change know, you are likely as confident that you know DFT better than the thousands of scientists, among whom I am one, know it. Shall we debate the limitations of the accuracy of DFT, such as exchange-correlation energies? I await your learned response. Are you a DFT denier like you are a climatology denier?

    1. heath sux dix with his teeth

      “However, evidence amassed by thousands of PhD scientists over the past several decades with no evidence-based counter evidence appearing”
      actually no that still doesnt make it true, or evidence. this is like the aether theory lol

      1. Heath Watts

        Is the aether theory the extent of your scientific background? Maybe you’d like to bring up Piltdown Man to attempt to discredit evolutionary biology too.

        I hope that you’re getting paid by an oil company to spread their lies; otherwise, you’re making a fool of yourself for free. One hopes that we grownups will eventually prevail before humans go extinct.

        By the way, I’m not a homophobe, so your 4th grade level insult doesn’t bother me, other than the thought that you should be on a watch list. Now, toddle away with the other imbeciles.

  18. Dinaric

    No way he is 190 cm. Lol americana/canadians lie at least 2 inches (5cm) about their hight
    Maybe even more. He looks tall vecaise Lex is a manlet

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *