i forget where i came across this article, but its interesting. can you guys explain why he never saw results, despite eating/working out for a long time?
you should pay a little bit more attention when you read. It never says he’s never seen results.
“The 1991 Salute to G.I. Joe model had 16.5-inch biceps, while his waist shrunk to 29 inches �?? approaching the limits of what a man can achieve without steroids”
where do they get that rubbish
20" arms you could call substance abuse but 16.5" is pretty normal
I mean, 6’ and 200lb at 7% bodyfat is above the mark any drug-free man can hope to reach? Really?
This is so stupid body image problems. Articles like this just make fat people stay fat and is why you see 300 pound girls with purple veins sticking out dressed like hookers.
it says he isnt satisfied today and goes on to talk about how most guys never are despite putting in the work…is that becuase they simply aren’t following things properly with regard to diet and how they lift?
i find it hard to not see the results you want after putting in honest hard work and doing your research.
[quote]mafzal4 wrote:
it says he isnt satisfied today and goes on to talk about how most guys never are despite putting in the work…is that becuase they simply aren’t following things properly with regard to diet and how they lift?
i find it hard to not see the results you want after putting in honest hard work and doing your research.[/quote]
They have a fucking mental disease dude. It’s like asking why sczios don’t just stop being crazy.
[quote]wfifer wrote:
I mean, 6’ and 200lb at 7% bodyfat is above the mark any drug-free man can hope to reach? Really?[/quote]
Well the other thing is that they dont say whether or not they are considering supplement use.
[quote]mafzal4 wrote:
i forget where i came across this article, but its interesting. can you guys explain why he never saw results, despite eating/working out for a long time?
http://www.bw.lehigh.edu/story.asp?ID=19387
[/quote]
First as someone else has already stated he did see results
also did u hear his training style, it sounded horrible, he was clearly overworking and then not eating enough and at some points even throwin up after meals… sounds like a sure fire way to stymie gains to me
people are idiots.
You just tricked me into reading that whole stupid article.
Thats not nice.
I’m gonna go heave and blame you.
[quote]legend wrote:
“The 1991 Salute to G.I. Joe model had 16.5-inch biceps, while his waist shrunk to 29 inches �?? approaching the limits of what a man can achieve without steroids”
where do they get that rubbish
20" arms you could call substance abuse but 16.5" is pretty normal
[/quote]
mine are only 17 1/4 so i guess i’m normal…lol.
this is pretty obvious. Some people have image problems. the end. woooo weeee, such difficult concepts to wrap my head around.
[quote]legend wrote:
“The 1991 Salute to G.I. Joe model had 16.5-inch biceps, while his waist shrunk to 29 inches �?? approaching the limits of what a man can achieve without steroids”
[/quote]
Ha! I have 16.75 and 17" arms and I ONLY do pullups. 34" waist though.
I wonder how healthy and muscular the author of that article is.
That was pretty ridiculous though. Particularly ignorant was the statement that those bodybuilders you see in the gym are walking around with “dark secrets”.
I get tired of seeing feeble attempts like this to put others down for their hard work. And they ALWAYS end up blaming steroids, with no direct or provable allegations that relate to their point.
It’s just horseshit.
[quote]legend wrote:
“The 1991 Salute to G.I. Joe model had 16.5-inch biceps, while his waist shrunk to 29 inches �?? approaching the limits of what a man can achieve without steroids”
where do they get that rubbish
20" arms you could call substance abuse but 16.5" is pretty normal
[/quote]
Reading that I thought they meant 29" waist and not the 16.5 biceps being achievable with steroids only. But yeah, that’s bunk all the same.