Don't make me shoulder YOUR burden. I pointed you in the right direction, if you want me to do your homework for you as well then you'll have to pay me. I accept brownies or euros. Let's not forget who wanted to drop the conversation when it didn't go their way...
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
So I just got back from the cardiologist's office
- Thread starter Jankauskas
- Start date
Don't make me shoulder YOUR burden. I pointed you in the right direction, if you want me to do your homework for you as well then you'll have to pay me. I accept brownies or euros. Let's not forget who wanted to drop the conversation when it didn't go their way...
Jankauskas
Member
I made a statement which you questioned, claiming to know the absolute truth. I asked for concrete proof which should be easy to provide given its the truth, yet you failed to do so for some reason (you dont have it).
The burden isn't mine, its your choice if you want to keep believing Arnold was natural at 16 years old and Lee Priest aswell, you may even keep believing that Santa exists, thats your choice to make at the end of the day.
I will keep my stance on this, show me a case study about how some people have the ability to develop unsurmountable ammounts of muscle mass over others and I will recognize im wrong, until then, aufwiedersehen.
There are no studies because it is something that can be seen everywhere. People respond differently to things.
Jankauskas
Member
If there are no studies, then its a matter of opinion and everyone is entitled to their own.
I asked him for proof because I knew he cannot produce it, yet he attacked my opinion and started to mention fallacies, which is what dumb people that want to look smart on the internet do.
I did not attack anyone's opinion, merely stated my own, and like I already mentioned, I know that Arnold is a lot of people's hero, and god forbid you "slander" the man by saying that he started juicing as a teenager, but I just dont believe that the guy got anywhere near his development at 16 with run-of-the-mill cycles, let alone naturally.
Hes more densely muscled than any physique competitor for sure. And he was competing in the 1800's...
Psh(steroids werent invented yet
)Hell...hes bigger and more ripped than a portion of dudes on here jackin roids.
If i didnt tell you he was from the 1800s youd of said hes on roids. I know you would of. But hes not. Hes definitely not the only one. Far better can be achieved without steroids. ARE YOU LISTENING YET!
Jankauskas
Member
Looks very good, but the guy isnt very big. You can see by his arms.View attachment 77520
Hes more densely muscled than any physique competitor for sure. And he was competing in the 1800's...
Psh(steroids werent invented yet
Hell...hes bigger and more ripped than a portion of dudes on here jackin roids.
If i didnt tell you he was from the 1800s youd of said hes on roids. I know you would of. But hes not. Hes definitely not the only one. Far better can be achieved without steroids. ARE YOU LISTENING YET!
Inpressive nonetheless.
Statement=claim. Burden of proof is in the one making the claim. You're smart enough to understand it but dumb enough to try and use semantics to escape it. You asked me to do your job. It's not in me to disprove your claim but in you to support it which you've done with a hocus pocus of bullshit so far, some whining here and there, and adamant refusal to acknowledge anything provided to you. I could post irrefutable evidence till it came out of your ass but you'd still be here plugging your ears and crying yourself to sleep bc your ideas were challenged.
Once again, this suits you perfectly well
By attacking your opinion you mean saying you're incorrect? Are you that much of a crybaby now? Cheese and rice, is there anyway I can post that more softly for your fragile feelings lmao?
More of your bullshit by saying you didn't attack anyone's opinion yet you're telling ErickR that you can't believe anyone is as dumb as him in this day and age for having his opinion. You're either 20yo, half retarded, or gender identify as a female. Which is it?
Can't it be all three?
Jankauskas
Member
Go fuck yourself.
100% correct. They're not mutually exclusive.
There's that tween female I was expecting!
I'll let you watch for a super low price of $4.99/min.
Persuasive response.
I stand convinced of your position's well supported background now.
Sk8man101
Member
Damn protein powder wasn't even invented yet.View attachment 77520
Hes more densely muscled than any physique competitor for sure. And he was competing in the 1800's...
Psh(steroids werent invented yet
Hell...hes bigger and more ripped than a portion of dudes on here jackin roids.
If i didnt tell you he was from the 1800s youd of said hes on roids. I know you would of. But hes not. Hes definitely not the only one. Far better can be achieved without steroids. ARE YOU LISTENING YET!
Shit microbiology was BARELY even discovered.
Inquiring Mind
Member
Wow, one thing I always liked about bodybuilding forums is our modern religion of radical egalitarianism just doesn't exist here. But here we a true believer.
No, genetics determine EVERYTHING. This is why there is very little new pharmaceutical research. Now that CRISPR technology is reliable and relatively cheap, the future is gene editing.
Every single drug has a wide range of therapeutic effectiveness with certain population groups responding differently.
I mean, talk to any veterinarian. This is true for dogs and cats and horses. Why would it not be true for humans?
Jankauskas
Member
I don’t know if you noticed but this thread is almost 1year old.
If I remember correctly (I’m not going to bother reading the whole thread again), claims were being made that pros achieved their size and leanness on a moderate dosage of aas because their genetics allowed them to achieve massive growth on very little amounts.
At the time I was ignorant about the true reality of what is going on, but even though I suspected that the dosages being used at least nowadays were massive, I didn’t have anything to back up that claim.
A year later I still don’t, but I have talked with people in the know, and they have told me that there are massive dosages involved, we are talking about several grams a week of several different compounds, plus HGH as much as people can afford, insulin, and as much increlex as money allows.
Like I said earlier, I don’t have anything to present here to prove to people wether this is true or not, but it was enough for me to satisfy my personal curiosity about the matter.
I still believe that while people may respond differently to the same amounts of a certain substance, there wouldn’t be a massive difference in terms of results.
If people want to believe that Arnold Schwarzenegger achieved his physique on 30 mg dbol/day, 500 mg of test and 400 of deca per week because he was some kind of god that’s their belief, I personally believe that while he had amazing genetics (bone structure, muscle bellies), he did not achieve that on gymrat beginner cycle amounts.
Yea and some still believe in the tooth fairy, lol!
Jankauskas
Member
A lot of people still do.
Few know Arnie put on 85 pounds in TEN years WOW, not. And this is entirely consistent with moderate PED dosages.
While Ronnie Coleman doubled
Armies achievements maxing out at 343, lbs in EIGHT years.
Few also know the primary difference bt contemporary B.B. and those of Arnie’s era was one of MASS vs SYMMETRY.
Rest assured Arnie’s PED dosage was a paltry sum by today’s standards.
While Ronnie Coleman doubled
Armies achievements maxing out at 343, lbs in EIGHT years.
Few also know the primary difference bt contemporary B.B. and those of Arnie’s era was one of MASS vs SYMMETRY.
Rest assured Arnie’s PED dosage was a paltry sum by today’s standards.
Similar threads
Sponsors
Latest posts
-
-
-
MESO-Rx Sponsor PCT 24X7 "1 stop shop for all day healthcare"
- Latest: Iksrohcic1