There seems to be a trend here where threads get turned into huge debates weather a lifter is natural or not. Latest thread being about Simeon Panda. i’m to be blame for that slightly.
But when does natural become unnatural?
1: When the FDA bans something? Using ephedrine was once the norm and was widely available, but now it is illegal and people say that using ephedrine makes you unnatural.
Pro hormones?
Steroids?
GH?
Insulin?
Do you become unnatural if you use something that isn’t synthesized from nature?
If so, ephedrine is from a plant?
And then on on the flip side, GH is synthesized but its already produced by our body and your just adding ‘extra’ you your body. So why is that considered unnatural?
Then this brings up ‘blood doping’ re administering your own blood to increase hemoglobin levels. This is widely considered unnatural, but what is more natural than your own blood?
If they FDA banned whey would that then make a lifter unnatural?
[quote]GrindOverMatter wrote:
Everyone has their own definition of “natural” but to me you become “assisted” when you start use of any exogenous hormones[/quote]
I concur. I don’t consider ephedrine to take you out of “natural” status
[quote]Marzouk wrote:
GH is synthesized but its already produced by our body and your just adding ‘extra’ you your body. So why is that considered unnatural?
[/quote]
because you have unnatural levels of that hormone, more than you would ever have naturally
when a lifter runs a cycle of AAS he gives up his natural status imho.
taking epinephrine would surely make your workouts a little more intense but thats about it. calling someone, who has appropriate levels of insulin, so no diabetics etc, unnatural because of insulin seems pretty dumb to me because there is little to no benefit coming from it w/o combining it with AAS.
nobody should give a shit about HGH because i don’t see any advantage in it for lifting weights/building your physique
[quote]yolo84 wrote:
this is a pretty dumb thread it is fucking obvious when natural becomes unnatural
i see no correlation between this and the panda thread either[/quote]
How is it pretty fucking obvious? People minds change all the time. Why does a hormone or extra test make you assisted? What about creatine?
No i’m not a retard who thinks creatine is a steroid, but external supplementation of it which give you levels never achieved naturally or that you can get from food. So what then.
Same goes with BCAA’s
What if creatine was banned? Then 10 years down the line people would oh creatine is doping.
Who is anyone to say that one supplement is classed as making you ‘unnatural’ and another isn’t?
Again im not a retard, i know about steroids and blah blah. I just wana know where the accusations end.
Oh and btw the correlation comes from Stu saying that Jeff Willet used a lot of pro hormomes back in the day.
[quote]yolo84 wrote:
this is a pretty dumb thread it is fucking obvious when natural becomes unnatural
i see no correlation between this and the panda thread either[/quote]
How is it pretty fucking obvious? People minds change all the time. Why does a hormone or extra test make you assisted? What about creatine?
No i’m not a retard who thinks creatine is a steroid, but external supplementation of it which give you levels never achieved naturally or that you can get from food. So what then.
Same goes with BCAA’s
What if creatine was banned? Then 10 years down the line people would oh creatine is doping.
Who is anyone to say that one supplement is classed as making you ‘unnatural’ and another isn’t?
Again im not a retard, i know about steroids and blah blah. I just wana know where the accusations end.
Oh and btw the correlation comes from Stu saying that Jeff Willet used a lot of pro hormomes back in the day.
[/quote]
ok sorry i upset you so much no you are not a retard
but in my opinion injecting test or insulin is in NO WAY comparable to protein supps or creatine etc
to say that it is retarded (not that you personally are retarded)
you keep saying what if such and such were banned but so what if steroids were legalised tomorrow they wouldnt become ‘natural’
manipulating hormones i.e. injecting them is not natural
please do not come up with some ridiculous retarded post saying but squats boost test or something so squats are not natural (not saying you are a retard or will say this am speaking generally)
also with regards to ‘where do accusations end’ if you have very low BF (sub 10%) and a high (220+) bodyweight at a normal height then of course it is likely you will be accused.
some people are extremely naive about steroids - they are VERY VERY common amongst the serious BB population.
before anyone mentions the amazing black supermen they know please realistically assess their likely BF and weight ahead of the yeah but bro my boy is at least 230 at like 8% BF!!! and he doesnt even train!!!
[quote]yolo84 wrote:
this is a pretty dumb thread it is fucking obvious when natural becomes unnatural
i see no correlation between this and the panda thread either.[/quote]
[quote]Marzouk wrote:
How is it pretty fucking obvious?[/quote]
Maybe just to the rest of us.
[quote]Marzouk wrote:
Again im not a retard, i know about steroids and blah blah.
No i’m not a retard who thinks creatine is a steroid
[/quote]
Insecurities?
[quote]Marzouk wrote:
What about creatine? No i’m not a retard who thinks creatine is a steroid
People minds change all the time. Why does a hormone or extra test make you assisted? What about creatine?
external supplementation of it which give you levels never achieved naturally or that you can get from food.[/quote] Are you sure? [quote]
Same goes with BCAA’s
What if creatine was banned? Then 10 years down the line people would oh creatine is doping.
Who is anyone to say that one supplement is classed as making you ‘unnatural’ and another isn’t?
Oh and btw the correlation comes from Stu saying that Jeff Willet used a lot of pro hormomes back in the day.
[/quote]
Sounds like you have some homework to do.
Creatine and BCAA’s don’t really give you something you can’t achieve naturally, just top your body off at levels that are difficult to obtain without. Too much and your body will just excrete it, enough rest and food your body can have the amount of creatine or BCAA’s it can use. Not the case with roids.
Banning something doesn’t mean it’s unnatural, what it means is the Government deems it dangerous. Marijuana was banned a long time ago in 2011.
3)Pro Hormones today and pro hormones back in the day are different. Many were just lighter steroids that were not banned.
When it comes to natural use common sense and don’t over think it. If you’re worried about where it ends it depends on how educated the person your talking to is. I know people that think protein is the same as steroids, you’re creatine example isn’t far from people that think that’s a steroid.
In my personal and simplistic view a supplement is natural if it is something that you could consume without the use of the supplement, regardless of whether or not you’d be able to consume it in the quantity it is available in. So in my mind creatine, protein powders, vitamins and fish oils etc are, of course, natural because you can consume them from non-supplement sources. The fact that they are available in supplement form simply makes them easier to consume in large quantities/cheaper/more convenient.
I believe that any supplement that doesn’t fall into this category is unnatural, so any kind of exogenous hormone or pro-hormone, as well as things like blood-doping.
But it is a very interesting question and I think it’s difficult to draw a line between natural and assisted.