sikdogg said:
Basically, you're basing your belief from a result of an informal survey?? That's anecdotal evidence at best... I'm not completely disagreeing with you, but i have my doubts.
Dude... You don't expect nature journal to conduct a formal survey on the topic of "Study of whether horny teenagers keep their beach muscles post-AAS". I am not basing it on the fact that most roid users said this... I am basing on the fact that every single one said it. I am basing on the fact that every single steroids guru will admit it once pushed to. No matter how informal, 100% is pretty conclusive.
Since i don't plan on stopping AAS use for another year or so, so i can't confirm or deny you claims.
This is exactly what I said. Most current steroid users fit this pattern. Rarely does one go for more than 1-1.5 years without AAS.
Another point i'd like to make is that most serious BB'ers also use GH and recently IGF-1. Both of these compounds are able to create new muscle cells thru hyperplasia. This means that people are now able to go beyond their genetics in terms of size and strength. This is different from from hypertrophy that AAS is known for. AAS is only able to enlarge one's muscle cell, not produce more. The hyperplasia properties of IGF/GH IS supported by several clinical studies. This alone should be enough to make a person bigger than what he was before he started.
That is very true. These new compounds are known to increase your genetic potential. This is why today we have 220 pound "naturals" at 3% bf. What is important to mention is that unlike with AAS, the health hazards of insulin, GH and IGF-1 are TREMENDOUS and very real.
Maybe once i stop i will be able confirm or deny your theory first hand. Until then, i'm a little hesitent to jump on your bandwagon unless you can post some study supporting this.
You do realize there is actually a valid study proving the effectivness of just about every crap supplement out there? Which ofcourse does nothing in the real world. You also realize that there are no studies proving why for example one style of training is better than another, yet in the real world it is? What does that tell you about studies? All you have to do to prove this wrong is find one person, just ONE person (out of the millions who've used) that has managed to keep steroid gains. Just ONE. No studies will be needed than.
Look. I respect (knowleadgeable AAS users) alot. And you definetely seem to be one. So if someone should ask me if skidogg should use, I would answer in a heartbeat YES, without hesitation. Because he knows what he's doing and its his choice, he's aware of all the facts.
What I'm trying to establish here is to let newbies know the truth. Steroids won't kill you. Infact, if you do it right they'll probably improve your life in many ways. BUT, I also want to let them know that you will NOT keep the muscle, it will not get you to your goal faster, it will actually slow you down in the longer run if you don't plan using them until you die. So I want to make sure that people actually are aware of this fact. If they are aware of it and still decide to use, then I'm all for it. It's their choice.
Like I said both sides (steroid and anti-steroid) will go to extreme lengthts to prove a point. What I beleive is that people are intelligent enough to make a decison themselves, and for that the facts should be shown. Steroid gurus should start telling people this fact, and anti-steroid folks should stop lying to people.
What's your ultimate goal weight?
