T Nation

Genetic Potential (Strange Measurements)

This is dumb. This is also why people are so fucking stupid lately that hormone replacement therapy is being threatened for men. All because people are too simple to think beyond “steroids = bad mmmkay?”.

This is why we will all be expected to get past the age of 40 while being controlled enough to think optimal quality of life is a bad thing.

When people as clueless as “bunny” here start creating laws, we are all fucked.

I personally would like to reach age 50 and still have sex like I was 25.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

I personally would like to reach age 50 and still have sex like I was 25.[/quote]
Bbbuut…bbuut that would be unnatural

[quote]Professor X wrote:
This is dumb. This is also why people are so fucking stupid lately that hormone replacement therapy is being threatened for men. All because people are too simple to think beyond “steroids = bad mmmkay?”.

This is why we will all be expected to get past the age of 40 while being controlled enough to think optimal quality of life is a bad thing.

When people as clueless as “bunny” here start creating laws, we are all fucked.

I personally would like to reach age 50 and still have sex like I was 25.[/quote]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7575024.stm

you are going to get soooo much pussy.

[quote]Bunny Bench wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
This is dumb. This is also why people are so fucking stupid lately that hormone replacement therapy is being threatened for men. All because people are too simple to think beyond “steroids = bad mmmkay?”.

This is why we will all be expected to get past the age of 40 while being controlled enough to think optimal quality of life is a bad thing.

When people as clueless as “bunny” here start creating laws, we are all fucked.

I personally would like to reach age 50 and still have sex like I was 25.[/quote]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7575024.stm

you are going to get soooo much pussy.[/quote]

He was talking about HRT, which is endangered because of people’s ignorant viewpoints of steroids.

If you take too much blood pressure medication you die. Take too much insulin - you die. Take too much pain killers - you guessed it - you die. That doesn’t mean that every one of these drugs should be absolutely and totally outlawed, they just need to be used carefully. Quit using the exceptions and extreme cases to define the entirety of users.

Read this before you post a response

[quote]JayPierce wrote:
Read this before you post a response

I read the entire thread.

I’m still against the use of artificial hormone replacement. But what they were talking about is different to what I am talking about.

They are older people over 40 and there natural test levels drop so they get hormones.

I get this.

They use moderate doses and know lots about as well as going for regular check ups. (blood work ect.)

Im referencing towards people who use stacks like tren,d-bol with test. Who obtain these drugs illegally.

Simple hormone replacement has side effects as well but the degree varies.

You are weak, that is why you suck.

Now leave and never come back.

[quote]Bunny Bench wrote:

I’m still against the use of artificial hormone replacement. But what they were talking about is different to what I am talking about.

They are older people over 40 and there natural test levels drop so they get hormones.

I get this.

They use moderate doses and know lots about as well as going for regular check ups. (blood work ect.)

Im referencing towards people who use stacks like tren,d-bol with test. Who obtain these drugs illegally.

Simple hormone replacement has side effects as well but the degree varies.[/quote]
It’s not as different as you might think. What’s the difference between someone whose T has dropped… someone whose T is naturally low… and someone whose T is naturally high, but they all want it to be higher? How do we decide who is allowed to supplement and who isn’t?

Don’t give me the old “legal vs. illegal” response, either. That’s a cop-out. Imagine you were making the law from scratch. How would you objectively define the line between acceptable and unacceptable?

[quote]JayPierce wrote:

[quote]Bunny Bench wrote:

I’m still against the use of artificial hormone replacement. But what they were talking about is different to what I am talking about.

They are older people over 40 and there natural test levels drop so they get hormones.

I get this.

They use moderate doses and know lots about as well as going for regular check ups. (blood work ect.)

Im referencing towards people who use stacks like tren,d-bol with test. Who obtain these drugs illegally.

Simple hormone replacement has side effects as well but the degree varies.[/quote]
It’s not as different as you might think. What’s the difference between someone whose T has dropped… someone whose T is naturally low… and someone whose T is naturally high, but they all want it to be higher? How do we decide who is allowed to supplement and who isn’t?

Don’t give me the old “legal vs. illegal” response, either. That’s a cop-out. Imagine you were making the law from scratch. How would you objectively define the line between acceptable and unacceptable?[/quote]

easy I just wouldn’t let people have it for vanity purposes.

[quote]Bunny Bench wrote:

[quote]JayPierce wrote:

[quote]Bunny Bench wrote:

I’m still against the use of artificial hormone replacement. But what they were talking about is different to what I am talking about.

They are older people over 40 and there natural test levels drop so they get hormones.

I get this.

They use moderate doses and know lots about as well as going for regular check ups. (blood work ect.)

Im referencing towards people who use stacks like tren,d-bol with test. Who obtain these drugs illegally.

Simple hormone replacement has side effects as well but the degree varies.[/quote]
It’s not as different as you might think. What’s the difference between someone whose T has dropped… someone whose T is naturally low… and someone whose T is naturally high, but they all want it to be higher? How do we decide who is allowed to supplement and who isn’t?

Don’t give me the old “legal vs. illegal” response, either. That’s a cop-out. Imagine you were making the law from scratch. How would you objectively define the line between acceptable and unacceptable?[/quote]

easy I just wouldn’t let people have it for vanity purposes.
[/quote]
OBJECTIVELYadj.
3.
a. Uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices: an objective critic. See Synonyms at fair1.
b. Based on observable phenomena; presented factually: an objective appraisal.

You can’t base law on opinion. Well, you could, but we call that tyranny. There must be a reason. Facts. Something measurable. You wouldn’t want me outlawing poptarts and waffles on a whim, would you?

[quote]JayPierce wrote:

[quote]Bunny Bench wrote:

[quote]JayPierce wrote:

[quote]Bunny Bench wrote:

I’m still against the use of artificial hormone replacement. But what they were talking about is different to what I am talking about.

They are older people over 40 and there natural test levels drop so they get hormones.

I get this.

They use moderate doses and know lots about as well as going for regular check ups. (blood work ect.)

Im referencing towards people who use stacks like tren,d-bol with test. Who obtain these drugs illegally.

Simple hormone replacement has side effects as well but the degree varies.[/quote]
It’s not as different as you might think. What’s the difference between someone whose T has dropped… someone whose T is naturally low… and someone whose T is naturally high, but they all want it to be higher? How do we decide who is allowed to supplement and who isn’t?

Don’t give me the old “legal vs. illegal” response, either. That’s a cop-out. Imagine you were making the law from scratch. How would you objectively define the line between acceptable and unacceptable?[/quote]

easy I just wouldn’t let people have it for vanity purposes.
[/quote]
OBJECTIVELYadj.
3.
a. Uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices: an objective critic. See Synonyms at fair1.
b. Based on observable phenomena; presented factually: an objective appraisal.

You can’t base law on opinion. Well, you could, but we call that tyranny. There must be a reason. Facts. Something measurable. You wouldn’t want me outlawing poptarts and waffles on a whim, would you?[/quote]

actually I would. You would probably be saving the lives of many diabetics. And while your at It ban smoking. Hell with It you can be dictator this country is going to hell anyway.

[quote]actionboy wrote:
penis[/quote].

[quote]Bunny Bench wrote:

actually I would. You would probably be saving the lives of many diabetics. And while your at It ban smoking. Hell with It you can be dictator this country is going to hell anyway.[/quote]
This country is headed down hill because ignorant people blindly follow exploitative propaganda and allow the government to make all of their decisions for them.

If you have given up on personal freedom, personal responsibility, and personal thought, please feel free to leave my country, because you are not American. Move to China or Venezuela or one of those other countries where personal thought is discouraged and/or illegal. I would rather not have you here, voting my freedom away.

[quote]JayPierce wrote:

[quote]Bunny Bench wrote:

actually I would. You would probably be saving the lives of many diabetics. And while your at It ban smoking. Hell with It you can be dictator this country is going to hell anyway.[/quote]
This country is headed down hill because ignorant people blindly follow exploitative propaganda and allow the government to make all of their decisions for them.

If you have given up on personal freedom, personal responsibility, and personal thought, please feel free to leave my country, because you are not American. Move to China or Venezuela or one of those other countries where personal thought is discouraged and/or illegal. I would rather not have you here, voting my freedom away.[/quote]

china sounds good. At least then I might someday have a chance to destroy this country.

Ok I think everything that needed to be discussed on this topic has. To be truthful I’m all trolled out…So my apologise to everyone. I will now set my focus on taking these forums seriously.

But in case you can’t tell I really enjoy a bit of an argument so If you could direct me to some of the more hot topic debatable forums i would appreciate it. And I promise I won’t be so silly.

Once again my apologise for the time wasting but I must say I have enjoyed it and hope you guys have to.

Goodbye

[quote]BreStruction wrote:

[quote]actionboy wrote:
penis[/quote].

“I’m a little jealous”

lmao

[quote]Bunny Bench wrote:]
But in case you can’t tell I really enjoy being completely wrong in every argument
[/quote]
yup

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]Bunny Bench wrote:]
But in case you can’t tell I really enjoy being completely wrong in every argument
[/quote]
yup[/quote]

You can no more win a war than you can win an earthquake.

uh heck one more post to make it 100.

[quote]Bunny Bench wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]Bunny Bench wrote:]
But in case you can’t tell I really enjoy being completely wrong in every argument
[/quote]
yup[/quote]

You can no more win a war than you can win an earthquake. [/quote]

wars are won and lost all the time. that was not deep and philosophical… it was dumb

haha, i figured out how OP has 28" legs w/ 27" waist. he put his thighs together and wrapped the tape around both, going under his chair too, of coarse, as he was trolling the interwebz. Also, bunny, just because lots of doctors say that steroids are the cause, you automatically believe them?

The same doctors also say creatine is responsible for deaths and we should eliminate all fats from our diets, despite anybody who knows anything about the human physiology knows the body needs fat. You can’t believe everything you hear, well you can, but get used to getting grilled by everyone.

edit: just saw he admitted trolling and was done arguing, apologies.