Results 1 to 35 of 35
Thread: Natural vs. Whatever
-
09-14-2004, 07:17 AM #1
Natural vs. Whatever
I have been reading a lot of posts and debates lately about genetics and being a natural athlete vs being "unnatural". I have yet to see anyone define what makes one vs the other.
I know a lot of people I talk to think that the definition of "natural" is someone who has never used AAS. I find this laughable. As far as I am concerned there is no such thing as a "natural" athlete anymore. With all of the supplements available these days how can there be? I feel the only way to be "natural" is to never have taken any sythentic products like creatine, ephedra, protein powder, AAS, etc.
This leads me to my point. It seems that the definition is based on the legality of the substance being used. Since AAS is illegal does that then mean that the athlete that uses them is "unnatural" and the athlete that uses legal substances "natural"? I find this to be incredibly stupid. That we would allow lawmakers and politicians to define who we are as athletes by drawing a line between what they find to be acceptable or not. Especially considering there aren't many of them (aside from Jesse Ventura and Arnold) that looks like they've ever worked out.
Just an after thought...if you used ephedra while it was legal are you still a natural athlete even though it is now illegal?? Maybe I've opened pandora's box here? haha
JMHO
MT
-
09-14-2004, 07:20 AM #2
lol guess im natural as long as i have a script for steroids . cool, i rule.
its crap though. people twist reality to feel better about themselves.
-
09-14-2004, 09:21 AM #3
You are 100percent correct monkeytown. I have been thinking the same thing. People who are natural hate people who are using steroids . Why ? Because they are growing faster than they could natural ( they are using a shortcut ). But if for example there would exist a magic pill for fat men en women that would decrease there weight quickly and still be very healthy AND be legal, everone would think thats cool.
-
09-14-2004, 09:41 AM #4Originally Posted by SaTyR
-
09-14-2004, 09:45 AM #5
I think "natural" vs. "unnatural" comes from the fact that with steroids you are going above your genetic limit. If you stop taking steroids you will shrink until you are at your genetic limit or lower. Prohormones are legal and if you take them you are basically not a natural athlete any longer. They have been proven to raise someone above their natural limit. I don't think things like creatine would make someone "unnatural", it works well but only to a certain point. I haven't heard of creatine taking someone above their genetic limit.
So, you legal vs. illegal argument is thrown out the window. If there was a natural drug that did the exact same thing as juice, you would no longer be a natural athlete. I guess this is why things like t3 and clen aren't considered in the same light as juice. They are illegal but don't do anything that someone couldn't do naturally.
-
09-14-2004, 09:50 AM #6Originally Posted by SaTyR
Go figure.
I could go on and on about obesity and how easy it could be fixed/avoided, but I digress!! haha
MT
-
02-07-2005, 12:48 PM #7Junior Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Location
- georga
- Posts
- 64
Good thread. I just started posting here and have found some arguments already about what is natural and what isn't. I consider myself a natural, even though I did a useless vial of cypianate 2 years ago. I saw absolutely no gains, more than likely because I didn't use it properly. Therefore, my size and strength remained the same. I feel justified in saying that I'm still a natural, especially if you consider the pro guys and today's top powerlifters. Men are now benching around 900lb??? I don't feel any regret at all about considering myself a natural (by today's standards).
It's true, though, that if you are completely natural, then you might as well say that you've never taken any ingestible or injectible substance that would cause your body to change for the better. This would include creatine, ephedrine, etc. So, are any of us really natural? Like I said earlier, compared to the Ronnie Colemans and Jay Cutlers and Lee Priests of the world, hell yeah, I'm a natural.
-
02-07-2005, 12:54 PM #8
Good point Monkey. I couldn't give a f*ck about it though. I am in charge of myself and no one else can change my view of me. I will be a natural on roids.....lol. Really, don't let others affect your views everyone. The "natural" debate will go on forever. I look at it like this...if you don't get caught..you didn't do it (just don't try to bull loz those who know, like people here...lol).
-
02-07-2005, 12:57 PM #9Originally Posted by scriptfactory
Originally Posted by viking_warrior_2k
-
02-07-2005, 12:57 PM #10
hey test happens naturally in the body...test is natural...
-
02-07-2005, 01:04 PM #11Junior Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2004
- Posts
- 137
this is it: you juice, you are not natural. you dont juice, you're natural. i dont care if test is natural. so? not when you put more in your body, thats not natural. we are talking hormonally here. you can take creatine, ephedrine, but any pro-hormones, or gear is considered unnatural.
-
02-07-2005, 01:13 PM #12Originally Posted by Starkraven
And if we're strictly talking hormones here, you can make your body produce more testosterone by taking tribulus... or doing squats and deadlift..
It all has to do with the legalities IMO. Bull$hit laws.
-
02-07-2005, 01:18 PM #13Banned
- Join Date
- Feb 2005
- Posts
- 34
What about that JERKOFF SKip La Cour the "bodybuilder" now hes advertising natural products and natural bodybuilding. I had when assholes like that mislead the public.
-
02-07-2005, 01:27 PM #14Originally Posted by AandF6969
The general definition of natural: have never taken aas or prohormones, IGF, GH, insulin , any groth factors or antibodies. "natural" supplements are considered ok, such as creatine and protein.
-
02-07-2005, 01:29 PM #15Originally Posted by AandF6969
Are you trying to make yourself feel better about not being natural?
-
02-07-2005, 01:30 PM #16Junior Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2004
- Posts
- 137
dude man is correct.
AandF6969, taking hormones is unnatural. training is natural, dieting is too. whatever will take you past your genetical limit is unnatural. creatine will not do that. dude-man is spot on.
-
02-07-2005, 02:41 PM #17Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2004
- Location
- Europe
- Posts
- 525
I consider it "unnatural" if the body stays big only because of the amount of gear that is in the body. I don't care if you got big with steroids two years ago; if your body can keep/supply the new amount of muscles on itself I don't think your body is unnatural. Muscles are muscles either way.
If steroids are holding you up, it's not natural.
Test is natural.. but other compounds like deca is not natural. It's modified testosterone , and that's not natural. Who cares? Cilicon is not natural. No one cares...well..some do..
-
02-07-2005, 02:42 PM #18Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2004
- Location
- Europe
- Posts
- 525
Fat people are not natural either if you think deep enough!
-
02-07-2005, 03:27 PM #19New Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2003
- Posts
- 23
Here's the answer!
AAS change the composition of muscles. "Natural" muscles have fibers angled at a low angle (somewhere around 15 degrees). Once you cycle, the new muscle fibers become more inclined (around 60 degrees). That is one of the reason why your muscles look bigger.
So taking roids makes you "unnatural" becomes it changes the composition of muscles, creatine doesn't, hence making "natural".
-
02-07-2005, 04:00 PM #20Junior Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Location
- georga
- Posts
- 64
Hmm, interesting stuff so far. I like this thread! Keep it up, fellas, I'm learning a lot...
-
02-07-2005, 04:43 PM #21Originally Posted by kpoera3
-
02-07-2005, 04:45 PM #22
yeah. i iddn't know that "juiced" muscles grow at a different angle. is there any reason/evidence for this? that's a real new one to me (i am natural, at only 19)
-
02-07-2005, 04:58 PM #23
MY DEFENITION OF NOT BEING NATURAL:
Anything altering the natural hormonal levels of a human being.
-
02-07-2005, 06:33 PM #24Originally Posted by Dude-Man
-
02-07-2005, 10:31 PM #25Originally Posted by AandF6969
-
02-08-2005, 06:56 PM #26Originally Posted by kpoera3
-
02-09-2005, 05:26 AM #27
have u seen many "natural" guys with awesome bodies??? Because i haven't!
-
02-09-2005, 10:51 AM #28Originally Posted by judge_dread
Big ol legs, and older member who doesn't come around this board much definitely has a body that i would say borders on the awesome level, and he definitely puts up awesome weight.. like a 2000+ plus leg press and squatting 700 for reps..
-
02-10-2005, 04:55 PM #29Junior Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Location
- georga
- Posts
- 64
Know a guy...
Originally Posted by Dude-Man
-
02-10-2005, 07:41 PM #30New Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2003
- Posts
- 23
Variation muscle fiber angle
Godfather, do a google search on steroids and variation muscle fiber angle.
I read an article in MD about it some time ago.
Here's what i've found on the internet:
www.topbodybuilding.com/muscle-fiber.html
Hope this helps.
-
02-10-2005, 11:30 PM #31Associate Member
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Location
- I live at the gym
- Posts
- 275
fuk all the "natural" people who hate people who are "unnatural", who gives a $hit. Ill do whatever i want and they can do whatever they want.
-
02-11-2005, 06:21 AM #32Originally Posted by mule1983
-
02-11-2005, 09:00 AM #33Associate Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2004
- Posts
- 393
Genetics have a lot to do with "NATURAL" vs AAS, One thing I can say about myself is I can get as big without AAS naturally. And I mean diet only no supplements. Before you start flaming the difference is I am not as strong, my measurments are the same though. Then it turns into a whole other argument "well if your stronger you will get bigger" in my case no. I am the same size on or off which is not typical. I think there are a few guys out there that are in the same situation I am. I can change my bodyweight up 20 lbs or down 20 lbs in a short period of time.
-
02-11-2005, 09:13 AM #34Associate Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2004
- Posts
- 393
I dont think it really matters AAS or Natural. It is a competitive world and people hate what they envy. Meaning the all "Natural" guy at the gym vs. the guy thats 5'10 260 lbs solid as a rock. There might be a just a little envy there.
-
02-11-2005, 09:18 AM #35Writer
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Posts
- 1,733
It's basically discharging a psyshological need (compulsion) to explain mediocrity.
-For Example-
When someone says "xxx", it means "yyy"...
"Im Natural" = "I'm morally superior to you"
"I use steroids " = "I don't give a SH!T about your morality."
"I use low doses and get good results" = "I must have a better diet, work ethic, etc...than you"
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Heart and hair safe summer cycle?
03-25-2024, 07:30 PM in ANABOLIC STEROIDS - QUESTIONS & ANSWERS