Which supplements are a MUST?

[IM708]

I have for close to 20 years. You would be hard pressed to tell a difference in the real world. The big difference you speak of is not in aminos vs protein but what works in the real world vs in a lab. I will not spend hard earned cash on stuff that looks good on paper but seems to make no difference in the gym or mirror.

I have tried aminos, took them for years and you know what? A protein shake and a steak will do the same or better for far less. You do need BCAA's. But IMO its a waste of money to buy them.

Ever seen anyone get huge on BCAA's? No, and no one else has either. When I take 20 grams of glutamine per day I feel it. When I jack my protein up to 2 grams per lb of BW I feel it. What I take 40 amino tabs at a time the only thing I feel is my wallet getting lighter.

You argue science but wait...is this the same science that just a few years ago had people eating 70-80% carb diets? Is this the same science that a few years before that said no one needs more than 50 grams of protein per day? Is this the same science that said steroids don't promote faster or greater muscle gains? Yeah, you believe all that if you like, I'll stick with what I know actually does something through 17 hard years of training.

So your going to use the "I've been lifting for 20 years blah blah blah" card? Good luck with that bud.

[gunslinger2]

So your going to use the "I've been lifting for 20 years blah blah blah" card? Good luck with that bud.

Honestly, is that all you got from what I said? You completely ignore what your "science" has been saying for years in favor of attacking me on a personal level?

I don't here any answers from you. So I ask again: Ever seen anyone get huge on BCAA's? Is this the same science that just a few years ago had people eating 70-80% carb diets? Is this the same science that a few years before that said no one needs more than 50 grams of protein per day? Is this the same science that said steroids don't promote faster or greater muscle gains?

If you can answer yes to the first question about BCAA's and no to the rest then you may have some valid points. If not, you are just being a parrot and repeating what you read in a magazine. The problem with you is that you have no real life experience. I have been lifting almost as long as you have been alive. I know what works and what does not because I have tried most of it at some point and seen many hundreds of others do the same. All you know is what you read on google and in musclemag. You made this statement "I've been lifting for 20 years blah blah blah" card?" because you are young and get offended when people who are older and know more than you speak out.

Tough, deal with it. I await the answers to my questions.

[IM708]

I don't here any answers from you. So I ask again: Ever seen anyone get huge on BCAA's?

This is such a stupid question. Do you know the supplement regimen of all people who have ever lifted and can even prove this stupid question of yours? Hmm? It seems by your wording that you some how know the answer to this question. When did this product ever promise to make anyone "huge"? It called a supplement for a reason, a supplement to a much larger scheme that is required for someone to become "huge".

Is this the same science that just a few years ago had people eating 70-80% carb diets?

Not even in the same league.

Is this the same science that a few years before that said no one needs more than 50 grams of protein per day? Is this the same science that said steroids don't promote faster or greater muscle gains?

No and I would love for you to show me a LEGITIMATE study that actually comes to this conclusion.

If you can answer yes to the first question about BCAA's and no to the rest then you may have some valid points. If not, you are just being a parrot and repeating what you read in a magazine.

Those 5 studies I posted are created by LEGITIMATE institutions who do controlled studies and are then published, all found through my universities online library for journals. I'm not rehashing information I found that Jay Cutler is touting in a Muscle and Fitness magazine, do those studies look like anything I found inside a muscle magazine?

[gunslinger2]

This is such a stupid question. Do you know the supplement regimen of all people who have ever lifted and can even prove this stupid question of yours? Hmm? It seems by your wording that you some how know the answer to this question. When did this product ever promise to make anyone "huge"? It called a supplement for a reason, a supplement to a much larger scheme that is required for someone to become "huge".

I know the supplement regimens of many people, myself included. As well as a few people who know more about bodybuilding than you or I ever will and by and large they agree aminos are a waste. Show me some proof that taking extra BCAA's make a real measurable difference. Show me a study or two were there are two control groups and the one group that takes the BCAA's make significant muscular gains over those not taking them. I don't want to see the studies made by the sup companies either. Remember in my first post I said you do need BCAA's but its a waste to buy them.

Not even in the same league.

Why not? The same people who are telling us to take our BCAA's are some of the same experts that were giving out that kind of advice just a few short years ago. They are also the same people that said eggs will kill you, no wait....they are really good for you....wait, no, only the whites......give me a f**kin' break.

No and I would love for you to show me a LEGITIMATE study that actually comes to this conclusion.

Protein Needs - US Guidelines on Protein and Diet

The Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA) of protein according to U.S. government standards is 0.8 gram per kilogram (2.2 pounds) of ideal body weight for the adult. This protein RDA is said to meet 97.5% of the population's needs.

Adult Male Protein Needs

An adult male who should weigh about 154 pounds, or 70 kilograms, requires about 56 grams of protein daily.


The British Association for the Advancement of Science says 1 gram per kilo of BW.

This is an example of that "science" you speak of.

LEGITIMATE institutions also came up with the crap I spoke of. Again I say there is a BIG difference in what works in the real world and what works in a lab. Most of the crap that is sold at the local GNC has some base in the lab. The problem with 95% of it is that this does not translate over to real life.

[IM708]

I know the supplement regimens of many people, myself included. As well as a few people who know more about bodybuilding than you or I ever will and by and large they agree aminos are a waste. Show me some proof that taking extra BCAA's make a real measurable difference. Show me a study or two were there are two control groups and the one group that takes the BCAA's make significant muscular gains over those not taking them. I don't want to see the studies made by the sup companies either. Remember in my first post I said you do need BCAA's but its a waste to buy them.

Do you understand how a supplement works? It supplements a much bigger regimen that would be required to build muscle. What you are asking is IMPOSSIBLE. Those studies I have posted shows that it stimulates proteolysis in turn muscle protein synthesis. What more can I say, there is no study that could exist what you are asking!

Why not? The same people who are telling us to take our BCAA's are some of the same experts that were giving out that kind of advice just a few short years ago. They are also the same people that said eggs will kill you, no wait....they are really good for you....wait, no, only the whites......give me a f**kin' break.

How do you know that, a claim you can't prove. Who is they? Try again.

Protein Needs - US Guidelines on Protein and Diet

The Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA) of protein according to U.S. government standards is 0.8 gram per kilogram (2.2 pounds) of ideal body weight for the adult. This protein RDA is said to meet 97.5% of the population's needs.

Adult Male Protein Needs

An adult male who should weigh about 154 pounds, or 70 kilograms, requires about 56 grams of protein daily.


The British Association for the Advancement of Science says 1 gram per kilo of BW.

This is an example of that "science" you speak of.

Those are the minimum requirements for a human not to feel and adverse health effects. Totally irrelevant.

LEGITIMATE institutions also came up with the crap I spoke of. Again I say there is a BIG difference in what works in the real world and what works in a lab. Most of the crap that is sold at the local GNC has some base in the lab. The problem with 95% of it is that this does not translate over to real life.

You can't prove this claim at all, same as a last one. You base your argument off of inferences you made, nothing that is down on paper. Can you please stop with this garbage?

[dec11]

So your going to use the "I've been lifting for 20 years blah blah blah" card? Good luck with that bud.

and that means nothing? i was on a strict competitive (natural) routinue for years and i have nailed down what works supplement wise, i've used everything from a-z. dont write of experience, thts just stupid. age 19 on your profile, that says it all, we'll debate again in a few years mate, during tht time trying using all the stuff your proclaiming. ever hear the phrase, 'dont believe everything you read'? i've been taught by a world class sports competitive lecturer who also rubbishes aminos, and i tend to take advice by someone who has been trained on an international scale by guess what, sports and nutritional scientists.

[IM708]

and that means nothing? i was on a strict competitive (natural) routinue for years and i have nailed down what works supplement wise, i've used everything from a-z. dont write of experience, thts just stupid.

It means nothing. Scientific data is what matter. As stated, too much bias results from using one persons real world experience reguarding variance topics.

age 19 on your profile, that says it all, we'll debate again in a few years mate, during tht time trying using all the stuff your proclaiming. ever hear the phrase, 'dont believe everything you read'?

Good use of age bias, that is a great way to end your argument. I'm done arguing with you, you keep throwing more bullshit in your argument. Age means nothing, ever seen how old some of our smarter members are here? Phate, 20 years old...

i've been taught by a world class sports competitive lecturer who also rubbishes aminos, and i tend to take advice by someone who has been trained on an international scale by guess what, sports and nutritional scientists

Who?


My original point still stands in this way over drawn thread. BCAAs have been scientifically proven to be a beneficial supplement. No matter the amount of gibberish you or gunslinger throw on it, my point still stands.

[dec11]

It means nothing. Scientific data is what matter. As stated, too much bias results from using one persons real world experience reguarding variance topics.

Good use of age bias, that is a great way to end your argument. I'm done arguing with you, you keep throwing more bullshit in your argument. Age means nothing, ever seen how old some of our smarter members are here? Phate, 20 years old...
Who?


My original point still stands in this way over drawn thread. BCAAs have been scientifically proven to be a beneficial supplement. No matter the amount of gibberish you or gunslinger throw on it, my point still stands.

goodbye lad, no point in arguing with you, you'll always be right

[Swifto]

and that means nothing? i was on a strict competitive (natural) routinue for years and i have nailed down what works supplement wise, i've used everything from a-z. dont write of experience, thts just stupid. age 19 on your profile, that says it all, we'll debate again in a few years mate, during tht time trying using all the stuff your proclaiming. ever hear the phrase, 'dont believe everything you read'? i've been taught by a world class sports competitive lecturer who also rubbishes aminos, and i tend to take advice by someone who has been trained on an international scale by guess what, sports and nutritional scientists.

Your rubbishing peer-reviewed scientific published data? For "personal experience"?

You meen to tell me you tried the exact diet, training regime and experimented on various supplements throughout "20 years" and took every variable into account, then formulated an opinoin based on the data? What have you concluded over "20 years".

You see, I get ****ed off with people saying, I did this and that over X amount of years as it means close to nothing when put next too a published study. When you argue a point, you need to present some sort of argument and "20 years" experience, means very little when claiming the opposite of published clinical data by various universities conducted by medical professionals.

[dec11]

Your rubbishing peer-reviewed scientific published data? For "personal experience"?

You meen to tell me you tried the exact diet, training regime and experimented on various supplements throughout "20 years" and took every variable into account, then formulated an opinoin based on the data? What have you concluded over "20 years".

You see, I get ****ed off with people saying, I did this and that over X amount of years as it means close to nothing when put next too a published study. When you argue a point, you need to present some sort of argument and "20 years" experience, means very little when claiming the opposite of published clinical data by various universities conducted by medical professionals.

how can it mean very little? and yes i was dedicated when i was competing and ate the same boring crap for years and as i competed in plifting there really are only three lifts to be concerned with, the only diff variables were illness and injury. in answer to your statement in bold, creatine, zma, hmb and the standard vits are all i'd consider useful. you guys apparently know more than every experienced person i know in competitive athletics and years experience under their belts? i can name 13 sports nutrition books in my collection, how many have any of you? gun slinger makes viable points like what killed you 10yrs ago is good for you today. arguements like never take your creatine along with your protein 15 years ago, now we have 'clinically' proven all in one formulas. dont you think there are variables in clinically tests? they dont have testing over a big enough population and almost always end in 'in theory' or 'it seems'. and iron maiden, ive been taking the friggin stuff since b4 you where born. now, swifto, please explain to me why you would listen to ppls steroid experiences and not count ppls supplement experience. i am presenting a very viable arguement for experience/published book studies v internet published studies

[Swifto]

how can it mean very little? and yes i was dedicated when i was competing and ate the same boring crap for years and as i competed in plifting there really are only three lifts to be concerned with, the only diff variables were illness and injury. in answer to your statement in bold, creatine, zma, hmb and the standard vits are all i'd consider useful. you guys apparently know more than every experienced person i know in competitive athletics and years experience under their belts? i can name 13 sports nutrition books in my collection, how many have any of you? gun slinger makes viable points like what killed you 10yrs ago is good for you today. arguements like never take your creatine along with your protein 15 years ago, now we have 'clinically' proven all in one formulas. dont you think there are variables in clinically tests? they dont have testing over a big enough population and almost always end in 'in theory' or 'it seems'. and iron maiden, ive been taking the friggin stuff since b4 you where born. now, swifto, please explain to me why you would listen to ppls steroid experiences and not count ppls supplement experience. i am presenting a very viable arguement for experience/published book studies v internet published studies

The evidence that has been presented on BCAA's is new, or fairly new. I'm sure you'de agree newer research is better than older. Well, most of the time.

I can see were not going to agree on this. I have an opinoin on BCAA's and Leucine supplementation. I agree with the references presented.

You have an opinoin based on other opinoins and theory's from, it seems, individuals. Thats dangerous.

Do you take everything Anthony Roberts and Eric Portratz write in articles, as I can point out a fair few flaws.

Rather than take others views and try to present tham as fact, do your own research and read various journals.

[dec11]

The evidence that has been presented on BCAA's is new, or fairly new. I'm sure you'de agree newer research is better than older. Well, most of the time.

I can see were not going to agree on this. I have an opinoin on BCAA's and Leucine supplementation. I agree with the references presented.

You have an opinoin based on other opinoins and theory's from, it seems, individuals. Thats dangerous.

Do you take everything Anthony Roberts and Eric Portratz write in articles, as I can point out a fair few flaws.

Rather than take others views and try to present tham as fact, do your own research and read various journals.

jesus, no! anthony roberts is full of shit and always has been. i dont buy crap like tht, i mean proper sports nutrition books, think text book rather than bb orientated crap. yep we'll have to agree to disagree. i speaking based on my own experiences and some journals have confirmed it and yeah you could be right on the updated info but again i lean towards what i worked for me. cheers

[gunslinger2]

and that means nothing? i was on a strict competitive (natural) routinue for years and i have nailed down what works supplement wise, i've used everything from a-z. dont write of experience, thts just stupid. age 19 on your profile, that says it all, we'll debate again in a few years mate, during tht time trying using all the stuff your proclaiming. ever hear the phrase, 'dont believe everything you read'? i've been taught by a world class sports competitive lecturer who also rubbishes aminos, and i tend to take advice by someone who has been trained on an international scale by guess what, sports and nutritional scientists.

Exactly. Just a kid with less than five years under his belt and already knows everything there is to know about bodybuilding. Maybe one day he will be able to look back as we do and see just how stupid he was.

Age and personal experience mean a hell of a lot in bodybuilding. For many years myself and others have used our own bodies to put all these theories to the test and we have through trial and error found what works in real life and what just looks good on paper. Find all the studies you like and you still can't discredit years of real world experience.

You see, I get ****ed off with people saying, I did this and that over X amount of years as it means close to nothing when put next too a published study. When you argue a point, you need to present some sort of argument and "20 years" experience, means very little when claiming the opposite of published clinical data by various universities conducted by medical professionals.

Again its the same "medical professionals" who in the late 60's and early 70's claimed "steroids do not promote faster or greater muscular gains", but are now saying steroids cause everything from cancer to the common cold. You seem to think that if its backed up by published clinical data it cannot be flawed. At the same time you throw out years of real world experience.....WTF?

There is evidence Creatine Monohydrate works.

I don't think anyone has said anything about Creatine, Creatine Ethyl Ester, or Tribulas.

[Swifto]

Exactly. Just a kid with less than five years under his belt and already knows everything there is to know about bodybuilding. Maybe one day he will be able to look back as we do and see just how stupid he was.

Age and personal experience mean a hell of a lot in bodybuilding. For many years myself and others have used our own bodies to put all these theories to the test and we have through trial and error found what works in real life and what just looks good on paper. Find all the studies you like and you still can't discredit years of real world experience.





Again its the same "medical professionals" who in the late 60's and early 70's claimed "steroids do not promote faster or greater muscular gains", but are now saying steroids cause everything from cancer to the common cold. You seem to think that if its backed up by published clinical data it cannot be flawed. At the same time you throw out years of real world experience.....WTF?





I don't think anyone has said anything about Creatine, Creatine Ethyl Ester, or Tribulas.

No one did (well I guess I did). You missed my point(purposefully). But thanks for enlightening us with your ignorance.

Peer-reviewed published data holds far more water than "I've been doing it for 20 years, so its right". Studies are done on multiple individuals, taking a wide range of variables into account. Your one meesly subject, with many variables.

You havent conducted studies on multiple individuals, recording data beforehand and after, whilst keeping to the strictest of protocols (diet, training etc..). So how exactly have you formulated this opinoin of yours, over "20 years"?

[IM708]

Exactly. Just a kid with less than five years under his belt and already knows everything there is to know about bodybuilding. Maybe one day he will be able to look back as we do and see just how stupid he was.

So you will use age bias to, good idea, but don't make it a habit since it basically a cheap shot at someone.

On another note when did I say I knew everything? Up until several months ago I thought it was a useless supplement as well. But science doesn't lie, until I see new contradictory data my opinion stands as it always has.

Age and personal experience mean a hell of a lot in bodybuilding. For many years myself and others have used our own bodies to put all these theories to the test and we have through trial and error found what works in real life and what just looks good on paper. Find all the studies you like and you still can't discredit years of real world experience.

So you keep bringing up this personal experience, I don't give a shit how many non controlled "experiments" you have done on your body. A solid study which link A to B is much more powerful. Basically your argument against its use is this: 'BCAAs are useless because I said so,' not good enough.

Actually I can discredit real world experience, anyone with half a brain would see your argument as weak and transparent, especially since what you are presenting is disorganized/non existant data.

Continue on with your ignorant ways, I'm done with this discussion.

[dec11]

So you will use age bias to, good idea, but don't make it a habit since it basically a cheap shot at someone.

On another note when did I say I knew everything? Up until several months ago I thought it was a useless supplement as well. But science doesn't lie, until I see new contradictory data my opinion stands as it always has.

So you keep bringing up this personal experience, I don't give a shit how many non controlled "experiments" you have done on your body. A solid study which link A to B is much more powerful. Basically your argument against its use is this: 'BCAAs are useless because I said so,' not good enough.

Actually I can discredit real world experience, anyone with half a brain would see your argument as weak and transparent, especially since what you are presenting is disorganized/non existant data.

Continue on with your ignorant ways, I'm done with this discussion.

now that is blatant stupidity, why do ppl like myself ask experience of Big and Marcus regarding aas? because simply they have the experience and age (ie time spent doing something), something tht constitutes being hailed as a veteran, what experiences have you got at 19? and what about all the displaced bullshit that aparently were 'scientific'?

[IM708]

now that is blatant stupidity, why do ppl like myself ask experience of Big and Marcus regarding aas? because simply they have the experience and age (ie time spent doing something), something tht constitutes being hailed as a veteran, what experiences have you got at 19? and what about all the displaced bullshit that aparently were 'scientific'?

I'm sorry on the poor wording, there are certain occations where real world experience does apply. AAS there is no other choice since the science doesn't exist in vast quantities due to the fact of it being a controlled substance.

What I meant is Gunslingers real world experiance with his non controlled experiments using bcaas is weak and transparent. His claims based on real world experience is null and void.

[dec11]

I'm sorry on the poor wording, there are certain occations where real world experience does apply. AAS there is no other choice since the science doesn't exist in vast quantities due to the fact of it being a controlled substance.

What I meant is Gunslingers real world experiance with his non controlled experiments using bcaas is weak and transparent. His claims based on real world experience is null and void.

i dont mean to argue with or oppose you but you have to see that whats sauce for goose aint ness sauce for the gander. i had the same training partner for close on 10yrs, some supps worked him and not on me and vice versa. and believe me i tried everything poss to get an extra kilo or two on my three lifts, naturally with supps that is. not to say aminos dont work but they arent ness as an extra therefore not worth it, can easily get em thru shakes and diet.