# NATTY TALK - JUICE HEADS NEED NOT APPLY!



## hsmann87 (Jun 22, 2010)

Skip LaCour. (Legendary natural bb'er??? - yes open to debate i know). Here is a short recap of his philosiphies.

1. Don't think of being drug-free an insurmountable obstacle preventing you from building a great physique. You first must believe that it is indeed possible to create some amazing things with your physique without drugs. You must believe there is still a way to accomplish more with your physique even if you've had some pretty good gains in the past. Immediately separate yourself from those negative people who say it is impossible for you to do so.

2. Don't worry about who's taking drugs and who is not. The battle to become your very best is always against yourself-not against anyone else who is using drugs. Whether or not someone else is using drugs has no bearing on what you can and can't accomplish with your own physique. Worrying about who is on drugs, however, can have a seriously detrimental affect on everything you are trying to do.

3. Be patient. If you want to reach your full genetic potential without using drugs, you must look at your bodybuilding endeavors like the elite natural bodybuilders. You must look at your bodybuilding efforts as a series of long-term lifestyle choices. Instead of only setting short-term goals like seeing how huge you can get by next summer, create a clear vision of what you want to look like after five more years of living a disciplined bodybuilding regimen.

4. Develop certainty and confidence on a day-to-day basis with the training and eating habits you choose. Whatever strategies you choose, get the most out of them by exerting extraordinary effort. Make up for what others perceive as disadvantages with your exceptional work ethic, mindset, training habits, and eating regimen. When looking for a good workout routine or eating plan, look to one of the successful drug-free bodybuilders you admire most for guidance. That way, you won't have the convenient excuse that your plan didn't work because you are training naturally. You'll begin with a little more certainty and look a little bit more closely at your level of commitment if things don't work out for you as quickly as you'd like.

5. Be persistent. Even though you train without drugs, become relentless in your pursuit of finding a series of effective strategies that will help you reach your outrageous bodybuilding goals. Keep searching for the right answers. Who knows? Maybe the next one you try will launch you into a new level of massive growth.

6. Train with intensity. Training hard does not mean the same as training with intensity. Intensity can be described as giving 100 percent of your mind, body, and soul in every exercise, every set, every repetition, and every workout. Intensity means pounding the weights in a way that is so darn taxing that every single set ends in absolute failure. In other words, you have absolutely nothing left in reserve when the set is completed-not a 1/2 of a rep, a 1/4 of a rep, or even a 1/8 of a rep more. Intensity is maintaining this high standard of performance throughout an entire workout. Never be satisfied with your level of performance in the gym. Continually strive for the always improving, seemingly barely out-of-reach incredible standard of intensity when you train.

7. Train hard all year long. You must train hard in the gym and eat the right foods all year long if you really want to reach your ambitious goals. You don't have steroids or other drugs to compensate for mediocre, inconsistent training and eating habits.

8. Keep the number of calories you eat relatively high. You must control your metabolism if you want to duplicate the success of the top drug-free bodybuilders. Keep your caloric intake relatively high. Make your body gear its metabolism up-and prevent it from ever gearing down. If you have an average or slower metabolism, eat a lot of food and do a lot of cardiovascular training to keep your metabolism running hotter and more efficiently. If you have a faster metabolism, you must be extremely

committed to eating frequent meals that contain more nutrient-dense calories.

9. Stay relatively lean all year long. In the off-season, eating efficiently is what will build muscle. Do not eat to get fat. Do not eat to stay lean. Eat to build muscle. Consistently feed yourself high-quality protein for muscle growth and enough carbohydrates to keep you feeling strong. After prioritizing those needs, consume as much food as you feel comfortable eating while still managing your body fat levels.

10. Place a heavy emphasis on protein consumption. Protein is the most important nutrient for building muscle without drugs. Without enough high-quality protein, you are not going to grow at the rate you deserve to grow-and I don't care how hard you train in the gym. Make protein powder and meal replacements the foundation of your supplementation program. 

Enjoy. And train hard :beer:


----------



## WillOdling (Aug 27, 2009)

Iv just infected this thread, being a juice head n all!


----------



## hsmann87 (Jun 22, 2010)

Lol. Well while you're here with your repulsive syringes and vials you have as well have a read:lol:


----------



## sizar (Nov 13, 2008)

juice head .. i don't drink juice .. i am a water head


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

hsmann87 said:


> *Skip LaCour. Legendary natural bb'er*.


Well thats a false statement if ever I heard one


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

jw007 said:


> Well thats a false statement if ever I heard one


would tend to agree - dont believe him one little bit that he is natural


----------



## hsmann87 (Jun 22, 2010)

jw007 said:


> Well thats a false statement if ever I heard one


Haha. Thats a completely different debate in itself. I started the thread as inspiration for us mere "pencil necks"


----------



## SK-XO (Aug 6, 2009)

glen danbury said:


> would tend to agree - dont believe him one little bit that he is natural


Was jim cordova not meant to be natural?










Thats an amense physique even if not natty.


----------



## hsmann87 (Jun 22, 2010)

I know. Wasnt the intention. It was supposed to be an inspirational post. Not a post that turns into a natty/juiced debate as almost every other frigging thread on this forum ends up being!


----------



## Andy Dee (Jun 1, 2008)

hsmann87 said:


> *You first must believe that it is indeed possible to create some amazing things with your physique without drugs.*


I believe its also possible to get rid of headache without taking paracetamol or asprin, but i prefer not to suffer and wait tbh :lol:


----------



## YetiMan1436114545 (Dec 7, 2007)

I like milk.


----------



## WillOdling (Aug 27, 2009)

andysutils said:


> I believe its also possible to get rid of headache without taking paracetamol or asprin, but i prefer not to suffer and wait tbh :lol:


:laugh: :thumb:


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

the principles to muscle growth are exactly the same if your natural or take steroids.....steroids make the process much faster and return more quantity.....but natural or not you need to have a decent nutritional approach......

natural or not you need to have a decent training philosophy

natural or not you need to have a decent you need to get plenty of rest.....

to be fair the reason most "juice heads" as you put it give the naturals load of stick is because the majority(not all) think they are above those who take gear when they are not to be fair this post is a demonstration of that....

now JW comment about Skip La Cour could be taken with a pinch of salt but when a very gifted natural like Glen Danbury says the same then this has to be believed and if this is indeed true you are pasting up the words from a person who does in fact cheat


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

Pscarb said:


> the principles to muscle growth are exactly the same if your natural or take steroids.....steroids make the process much faster and return more quantity.....but natural or not you need to have a decent nutritional approach......
> 
> natural or not you need to have a decent training philosophy
> 
> ...


Errrrr:confused1: yeah cheers Paul!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

well you have been known on occasion to comment badly on naturals...


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

Pscarb said:


> well you have been known on occasion to comment badly on naturals...


But only those who genuinely deserve it :thumb:

Ive got nothing against NATTYS, Hell I even employ a few:lol: :lol: (lazy cnuts tho TBH)


----------



## 1Tonne (Jun 6, 2010)

I'm natty and honestly dont think i'll ever venture to the darkside. So yeh, good read, nice inspiration but right now, i need to eat. Cant concentrate so prob read it again later.

Thanks


----------



## BillC (Jun 11, 2009)

hsmann87 said:


> Skip LaCour. (Legendary natural bb'er??? - yes open to debate i know). :beer:


Who?? can't be that legendary


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

he loves us really :lol:

lets be honest here jim cordova is around 160-170lbs in contest shape

skip lacours contest weight is stated at 225-232lbs so we are talking 70lbs of difference between the two physiques

and its suprising that at one point he had that massive belly button which i have always been lead to believe is due to GH usage and now he doesnt anymore (like marcus ruhl)


----------



## SK-XO (Aug 6, 2009)

jw007 said:


> But only those who genuinely deserve it :thumb:
> 
> Ive got nothing against NATTYS, Hell I even employ a few:lol: :lol: (lazy cnuts tho TBH)


oi cnut! what have i done so bad to you :cursing: :lol:


----------



## sizar (Nov 13, 2008)

Pscarb said:


> the principles to muscle growth are exactly the same if your natural or take steroids.....steroids make the process much faster and return more quantity.....but natural or not you need to have a decent nutritional approach......
> 
> natural or not you need to have a decent training philosophy
> 
> ...


Great post again :thumb:


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

SK-XO said:


> oi cnut! what have i done so bad to you :cursing: :lol:


1) your scottish

2) you breath

Next

xxxx


----------



## hsmann87 (Jun 22, 2010)

Pscarb said:


> *the principles to muscle growth are exactly the same if your natural or take steroids.....steroids make the process much faster and return more quantity.....but natural or not you need to have a decent nutritional approach......*
> 
> *natural or not you need to have a decent training philosophy*
> 
> ...


Very true mate. Good post. But just wanted to reiterate the point that many nattys either use the excuse or think that they cant get massive without juice. Now i know there are certain genetic limits etc. and that it is virtually impossible to be ronnie coleman size without dabbling in the funky stuff, but I feel that many people (im not speaking on behalf of everyone here, but i have certainly spoken to a few people who have) are too quick to start taking aas without letting their body even adapt to training, nutrition etc properly first.

And lets face it, a lot of the people that are both on and off this site who are on aas have really done a pi55 poor job of it. I mean ive seen a lot of nattys who are bigger and in better condition than a lot of people who have done some pretty comprehensive cycles of aas. Glen being a prime example.

Please note that im not generalising, as the size and shape that guys like yourself, JW, Jordan etc have attained is phenomenal. You guys have "done it" properly. Its just sad to see many people abuse aas use without knowing jack about it.


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

dont get me wrong _ I would love to find out skip was natural - i love his attitude and his physique is outstanding - but if you look at the more stringent drug tested feds therer seems to be a massive gulf in class between them and the 'clean' feds he competes in - I suppose it depends on what you class as natural - lifetime, IOC list, prohormone etc etc


----------



## M_at (May 2, 2009)

hsmann87 said:


> Haha. Thats a completely different debate in itself. I started the thread as inspiration for us mere "pencil necks"


Not all of us have pencil necks mate. :tongue:


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

M_at said:


> Not all of us have pencil necks mate. :tongue:


You do


----------



## M_at (May 2, 2009)

jw007 said:


> You do


To match my pencil calves.


----------



## hsmann87 (Jun 22, 2010)

glen danbury said:


> dont get me wrong _ I would love to find out skip was natural - i love his attitude and his physique is outstanding - but if you look at the more stringent drug tested feds therer seems to be a massive gulf in class between them and the 'clean' feds he competes in - I suppose it depends on what you class as natural - lifetime, IOC list, prohormone etc etc


 yeha for me its natural.

ive been reading up a lot on Tim Martin recently. He says that he is lifetime natural and seems to reiterate it. Pretty inspirational dude. And he is running keto and benefiting greatly from it like me:thumb:lol


----------



## ANABOLIC-EDGE (Apr 28, 2008)

Yeah same rules apply, natural or not.

I tried natural recently for about 6 weeks, felt so weak, gay and useless....was such a beautifull treat to be getting back on the gear......Roar!


----------



## hsmann87 (Jun 22, 2010)

all said and done, i am reading Dwain Chambers autobiography and i quote the following:

*my overall bodyweight shot up from 195lbs to 217lbs. i had gone from a PB in my squats of 180kg to an impressive 230kg and i jump squatted this weight for 3 reps. my bench press also improved for 140kg for 3 reps at 165kg. all these improvements had a huge effect on my diet. i was able to eat the american version of a full english breakfast plus 4 american sized pancakes with cream and strawberries on top and 2 galsses of orange juice; and that was my breakfast before a training session!"*

fooking tempting to say the least haha


----------



## big_jim_87 (Jul 9, 2009)

as im bigger and stronger then the op i cba to even read the op


----------



## BB73 (May 19, 2010)

As someone who is just starting and doesn't know a lot about BBing it was an interesting read, there's not a lot in there that I havn't heard before, but it's always good to get a refresher & see things written in a different way, there's always something new you can pick up.

However, as said earlier the principles are the same whether on gear or not.

Excellent work op:thumb:


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

jw007 said:


> But only those who genuinely deserve it :thumb:
> 
> Ive got nothing against NATTYS, Hell I even employ a few:lol: :lol: (lazy cnuts tho TBH)


this is true, this is very true:thumb:



hsmann87 said:


> *lets face it, a lot of the people that are both on and off this site who are on aas have really done a pi55 poor job of it. I mean ive seen a lot of nattys who are bigger and in better condition than a lot of people who have done some pretty comprehensive cycles of aas*. Glen being a prime example.
> 
> Please note that im not generalising, as the size and shape that guys like yourself, JW, Jordan etc have attained is phenomenal. You guys have "done it" properly. Its just sad to see many people abuse aas use without knowing jack about it.


the section in bold is correct, i have seen hundreds of guys who take stupid amounts of gear yet they look no bigger than a guy who goes to the gym every now and again....the reason for this is that they feel the easy route is taking gear they feel they can still drink and throw everything they want up their nose at the weekends and eat crap all day but because they are on steroids they will be massive.....and when this does not happen they do one of 3 things

1 - use more gear

2 - slag the brand off as fake

3 - both 1 & 2

i know some great naturals Glen and fivos being just two of them but neither of them feel the need to advertise that they are natural like some....this need makes it plain to see that they have underachieved as a natural and feel by saying they are natural it is an excuse.....


----------



## hsmann87 (Jun 22, 2010)

Pscarb said:


> this is true, this is very true:thumb:
> 
> the section in bold is correct, i have seen hundreds of guys who take stupid amounts of gear yet they look no bigger than a guy who goes to the gym every now and again....the reason for this is that they feel the easy route is taking gear they feel they can still drink and throw everything they want up their nose at the weekends and eat crap all day but because they are on steroids they will be massive.....and when this does not happen they do one of 3 things
> 
> ...


 agreed. but then when i found out that they were natural i was doubly impressed at their feats. from a personal point of view, if the fact that they were natty was put out there a little more it would inspire new kids entering the sport to do things naturally, if not for the rest of their life then for the first few years at least. Anyway, I shall now STFU and go train:thumb:


----------



## green19210 (Jul 26, 2010)

As a university student in sport & exercise science, this thread has caught my attention. I am very keen on the areas of strength and conditioning, as well as nutrition and plan to base my dissertation on proteins and supplement use in 2 years time.

The whole argument of natural vs. un-natural is to me an interesting one.

I for one can see why people take steroids for quick effective gains, but can see why people choose to stay off steroids due too the risks of side effects or getting banned in their sports etc.

But it's the whole: "I stay 'natural' because that means im better", moral issue rubbish.

For me a natural athlete is someone who takes nothing. No supplement, protein or anything that in anyway give your body an extra help. So therefore I question the term 'natural' in the way hsmann87 or in fact any 'natural' bodybuilder or athlete uses it. Let me give you an example:

*Example 1*

Little Jonny goes to the gym with Peter. They both do a 1 hour upper body set, both working on the same weights and machines. Before the work out Peter takes his creatine and protein shake, while Little Jonny doesn't. After the work out Peter re-fuels his body with a protein shake and carbohydrate drink. Little Jonny drinks just plain old water.

2 days later they both go back to the gym and do the same set, but Little Jonny is still aching from the gym where as Peter is raring to go due to adding protein and the essential needs to his body.

Therefore giving him an un-fair advantage over Little Jonny.

*Example 2*

Little Jonny is struggling with his body fat, as is Peter. They both decide to go on a diet. They both follow the same diet, with the same meals, portions, eating time etc. But Peter goes down to his local supplement store and picks up some fat burners.

As the fat burners help speed up his metabolism, meaning he can break down food quicker than Little Jonny.

Again giving him an un-fair advantage over Little Jonny.

*Question: On those two examples who is the more natural?* Little Jonny or Peter?

My theory is, if your pumping your body full of extra protein, creatine, carbs or using supplements to aid your body then this is un-natural and therefore giving you an un-fair advantage over anyone who isn't.

Which is what 'natural' bodybuilders/athletes keep banging on about when the talk about steroid users.

*Now am I not saying steroids are ok in sport or anything like that before anyone starts moaning*.

I am merely saying that when you think about it how fine is the line between someone who take 4 protein shakes a day, weight gain, creatine, fat stripers etc. and someone who takes a small course of steroids, when your talking about being natural?

Just a thought.


----------



## M_at (May 2, 2009)

chilisi said:


> What is so bad, in your opinion, about people using steroids. 99% of people start off natural, then go down the AAS route.


That's quite a statistic. And total bull****.

If 99% of people go down the AAS route then it wouldn't be a difficult consideration for anyone.

And of all the people I know that use AAS 100% of them started off natural :tongue:


----------



## Bettyboo (Jun 8, 2009)

green19210 said:


> As a university student in sport & exercise science, this thread has caught my attention. I am very keen on the areas of strength and conditioning, as well as nutrition and plan to base my dissertation on proteins and supplement use in 2 years time.
> 
> The whole argument of natural vs. un-natural is to me an interesting one.
> 
> ...


Thats like sayin jonny two balls eats more chicken (protein) before he trains than the other guy so is gonna have an advantage on a guy who doesnt eat as much chicken before training :whistling: Oh lordy Which would make sense - dietry intake will effect your training - whether or not on AAS as it has been already pointed out on numerous occasions!

You can increase creatine and protein and some other naturally occuring cells or enzymes from every day cell cycles and from diet intake...the other aas you are comparing it with are mainly hormones which the body produces in a different way, completely different. Ie how much testosterone a guy has will vary from guy to guy, but as with protein they will produce the same amount of creatine naturally if their diet and training is the same, (you must have covered this if you are doing sports degree) So you cant compare it to taking protein really or drawing that fine line as you call it.

Maybe one guy is poor and cant afford all the protein and creatine heheh :lol:


----------



## green19210 (Jul 26, 2010)

Bettyboo said:


> Thats like sayin jonny two balls eats more chicken (protein) before he trains than the other guy so is gonna have an advantage on a guy who doesnt eat as much chicken before training :whistling: Oh lordy Which would make sense - dietry intake will effect your training - whether or not on AAS as it has been already pointed out on numerous occasions!
> 
> You can increase creatine and protein and some other naturally occuring cells or enzymes from every day cell cycles and from diet intake...the other aas you are comparing it with are mainly hormones which the body produces in a different way, completely different. Ie how much testosterone a guy has will vary from guy to guy, but as with protein they will produce the same amount of creatine naturally if their diet and training is the same, (you must have covered this if you are doing sports degree) So you cant compare it to taking protein really or drawing that fine line as you call it.
> 
> Maybe one guy is poor and cant afford all the protein and creatine heheh :lol:


I was only a thought and nothing that i have look into depth about (only being a first year).

But yes eating chicken is natural, pumping man made protein shakes isn't?


----------



## 07smclean (May 25, 2010)

yeh but at the end of the day protein shakes are just food which is natural.


----------



## ParaManiac (Mar 20, 2007)

green19210 said:


> As a university student in sport & exercise science, this thread has caught my attention. I am very keen on the areas of strength and conditioning, as well as nutrition and plan to base my dissertation on proteins and supplement use in 2 years time.
> 
> The whole argument of natural vs. un-natural is to me an interesting one.
> 
> ...


Lets hope your 2nd and 3rd year are more educational.I've just wasted 5 mins reading that rubbish.


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

07smclean said:


> yeh but at the end of the day protein shakes are just food which is natural.


Yeh but at the end of the day testosterone is just a hormone which is natural!!


----------



## DarkTranquility (Jul 30, 2010)

That comparison is a bit of a stretch. The testosterone you're talking about is a synthetic, laboratory-produced hormone that is sold illegally.


----------



## big-dog (Dec 29, 2009)

Pscarb said:


> this is true, this is very true:thumb:
> 
> neither of them feel the need to advertise that they are natural like some....this need makes it plain to see that they have underachieved as a natural and feel by saying they are natural it is an excuse.....


Good point you make there paul, :thumbup1:

We're all bodybuilders at the end of the day, okay so the rules might be slightly different for each type but at the end of the day the hard work time and effort we put into what we do are all the same.... assisted or non assisted.

Those that go on about it all the time and make an effort to point out they are natural could maybe do better by investing that effort into their diet and training rather that boring everyone with the chat about how good they are.


----------



## DarkTranquility (Jul 30, 2010)

^ Who is anyone actually doing that, though?


----------



## Bettyboo (Jun 8, 2009)

green19210 said:


> I was only a thought and nothing that i have look into depth about (only being a first year).
> 
> But yes eating chicken is *natural*, pumping *man made protein shakes isn't?*


Protein which is made with natural ingredients... you know sourced naturally from foods in the ground just made into a powder that you make into a drink... for convenience... a suppliement, that natural bodybuilders use (if weren't natural they wouldnt right????)

Like when you eat chicken thats not organic pumped full of yukky additives and water that you probably eat, you mean :lol:


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

DarkTranquility said:


> That comparison is a bit of a stretch. The testosterone you're talking about is a synthetic, laboratory-produced hormone that is sold illegally.


And the refining process to obtain whey isolates, and concentrates from milk is.........It's hardly natural, nature gave us the milk, man refines it into a powder through many processes.

And the sold illegally has no relevance on this conversation at all.


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

My point is, where is the line?


----------



## DarkTranquility (Jul 30, 2010)

Whilst protein powders are the result of the refining processes, so is the milk we buy. The powders are just isolated, dried dairy proteins.

Anabolic steroids, HGH, etc. are powerful synthetic hormones with specific medical applications in treating illness. Whilst I'm not against the performance/cosmetic use of AS, the comparison between dehydrated food and the misuse of these powerful phamaceuticals is not a convincing one.


----------



## hilly (Jan 19, 2008)

B|GJOE said:


> And the refining process to obtain whey isolates, and concentrates from milk is.........It's hardly natural, nature gave us the milk, man refines it into a powder through many processes.
> 
> And the sold illegally has no relevance on this conversation at all.


Exactly its not natural is it.

It just suits for people to say AAS isnt natural because it fits the argument when in fact anything that has been manufactued/changed/messed with by humans in a lab is not NATURAL. this IMO includes protein powders/creatine etc etc etc.

If you were a true natty you would only eat things that are not scientifically manufactured/alterd.

just my opinion tho:beer:


----------



## hilly (Jan 19, 2008)

DarkTranquility said:


> Whilst protein powders are the result of the refining processes, so is the milk we buy. The powders are just isolated, dried dairy proteins.
> 
> Anabolic steroids, HGH, etc. are powerful synthetic hormones with specific medical applications in treating illness. Whilst I'm not against the performance/cosmetic use of AS, the comparison between dehydrated food and the misuse of these powerful phamaceuticals is not a convincing one.


It doesnt have to be convincing. as anal and as stupud as it is if people want to sit on their high horse and say im a natural then they should be in every sense of the word not just what suits the rule of said sport/situation


----------



## pete-vtr (Jul 4, 2010)

IMO naturals are those that dont use ANY performance enhancing products of any kind.

so creatine, protein shakes, pro-hormones etc etc anything that contributes towards building muscle, So all those that claim to be natural and are comsuming these products are in fact just as natural as a steroid user. :whistling:


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

DarkTranquility said:


> Whilst protein powders are the result of the refining processes, so is the milk we buy. The powders are just isolated, dried dairy proteins.
> 
> Anabolic steroids, HGH, etc. are powerful synthetic hormones with specific medical applications in treating illness. The comparison between dehydrated food and the misuse of these powerful phamaceuticals is not a convincing one to me.


So what about when HGH wasn't synthetic, and was removed from dead bodies. Was it natural then????

If a doctor prescribes you a drug for a genuine ailment, that happens to have a fat burning, or anabolic effect, would the athlete be natural or not?

If steroids were made the old way, and refined from pi5s, would this be natural or not?

Are the following natural or not??

Ornithine Ketoglutarate

Arginine Alpha Ketoglutarate

Creatine Malate

Citruline Malate

HMB

What is a Drug?

Is Ma Haung which contains the alkaloid ephedrine a drug or natural?

Green tea which contains caffeine - drug or natural?

Sida Cordifolia which contains ephedrine like alkaloids - drug or natural?

Willow Bark which contains Aspirin - drug or natural?

Yohimbe Bark which contains the alkaloid yohimbine - drug or natural?

Hemp - Contains Tetrahydrocannabinol - drug or natural?

Magic Mushrooms - Contains Psilocybin - drug or natural?

Nature has given some of the most powerful chemicals known to man, some of which have profound effects on the body.

I am actually indifferent to the whole natural/drug debate, but I do like to give people who are obviously opinionated things to think about.


----------



## Bettyboo (Jun 8, 2009)

You could say that most of the processed foods we eat, most of it contains refined ingredients such as refined sugar, added this and that etc list is endless, so i guess these foods would be classed as not natural.

I guess its a personal opinion again like most things, highlighted by the use, over use/miss use, whatever or however you, me or other people refer or perceive it. One of those discussions that could go on forever I guess 

I think the line is so fine it would take an athlete, regardless of his/her sport to use organically grown produce including supplements, only with nothing used in the growing or manufacturing of it, ie seedlings up from what it was grown in blah blah etc to say that they are truly natural - thats just how I would perceive truly natural to be  You may agree or disagree depending on how you perceive it to be.

However, I do not think that either athlete natural or not is inferior or vice versa to one another. It still takes hard work to achieve what they have, regardless how they went about getting there. They just achieved it by using different methods.


----------



## Jimmy1 (Aug 14, 2003)

i class a natty as someone who doesnt use anything on the banned substances list


----------



## DarkTranquility (Jul 30, 2010)

hilly said:


> It doesnt have to be convincing. as anal and as stupud as it is if people want to sit on their high horse and say im a natural then they should be in every sense of the word not just what suits the rule of said sport/situation


I don't think anybody should be getting on their high-horse about being "natural" either but words are our servants, not our masters. "Natural" is widely-understood by those familiar with bodybuilding to mean "doesn't take performance-enhancing *drugs*".

Everybody ingests protein and creatine through food, so any definition of "natural" that excludes them is pretty useless.


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

pete-vtr said:


> IMO naturals are those that dont use ANY performance enhancing products of any kind.
> 
> so creatine, protein shakes, pro-hormones etc etc anything that contributes towards building muscle, So all those that claim to be natural and are comsuming these products are in fact just as natural as a steroid user. :whistling:


Training, eating and resting all enhance performance. So if I eat a better diet than you, this will 'enhance' my performance over you. That post is nonsense, it's almost impossible to rule out anything that enhances performance. If eat 5lbs of beef a day, and get 5g of creatine from doing it, is that natural in your book or not?

There is a book called unnatural athlete, which states quite clearly that we are all unnatural. Everything we do is fighting against the bodies own natural equilibrium called homeostasis. The human body doesn't want to be a lean calorie buring machine, and every trick we do to get round this is unnatural. This includes such practices as>

Getting out of bed and doing fasted cardio

Training to such an intense level

Eating enough nutrient rich calories to grow

Eating certain foods at certain times.

etc etc


----------



## hilly (Jan 19, 2008)

DarkTranquility said:


> I don't think anybody should be getting on their high-horse about being "natural" either but words are our servants, not our masters. "Natural" is widely-understood by those familiar with bodybuilding to mean "doesn't take performance-enhancing *drugs*".
> 
> *Everybody ingests protein and creatine through food, so any definition of "natural" that excludes them is pretty useless*.


Not at all. taking in normal levels thru food is natural. taking in a boatload thats been manufactured/changed and alterd in a lab is not. thats a fact mate no getting around it.

I also dont agree with the first part. just because its widely understood doesnt change the fact that if you are natural you dont take UNNATURAL substances. wether they are steroids/pro hormones/creatine and all the other stuff joe listed


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

Jimmy said:


> i class a natty as someone who doesnt use anything on the banned substances list


What is THE banned substance list?

The IOC one or the particular federation you are competing in?

This list is only constructed from the opinions of those that compile it. What about the designer substances that keep coming out, with the primary purpose of getting around 'THE' list, the ones that eventually get added once discovered by the governing body! If I have a bio chemist on my side, who studies the list, and makes it his job to beat it, and gives me the edge over the competition, is this OK, simply because the substance is not on list YET!


----------



## DarkTranquility (Jul 30, 2010)

BigJoe, I'm not suggesting some kind of fallaciously-naturalistic position that "natural" chemicals are "good" and that "synthetic" chemicals are "bad". I'm arguing that there is a widely-accepted definition of the word "natural" in bodybuilding, which accomodates the use of protein supplements but excludes the misuse of prescription-only pharmaceuticals.


----------



## SK-XO (Aug 6, 2009)

B|GJOE said:


> What is THE banned substance list?
> 
> The IOC one or the particular federation you are competing in?
> 
> This list is only constructed from the opinions of those that compile it. What about the designer substances that keep coming out, with the primary purpose of getting around 'THE' list, the ones that eventually get added once discovered by the governing body! If I have a bio chemist on my side, who studies the list, and makes it his job to beat it, and gives me the edge over the competition, is this OK, simply because the substance is not on list YET!


Tis true imo. Fkn I keep hearing the BNBF are banning several products lmfao. Aparantly boditronics redmist is banned :confused1: , I never knew this but you need to phone and ask them before you take a product. So many things are misleading. Novedex by gaspari is banned to, my friend took it because he spotted it in the shop, it's all misleading.

All these so called lists of what is banned and what isn't all doesn't make sense imo. It's all confusing and who actually chooses for it to be banned as every fed seems to be different :confused1: . Rather annoying and unfair imo.


----------



## Jimmy1 (Aug 14, 2003)

i play in a tested sport joe

there is a long list of substances that i cant use if i want to play in the season

http://www.wada-ama.org/en/

with regards the designer substances.....i agree they are not for a natty either....which is why they end up on the list in the end


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

DarkTranquility said:


> BigJoe, I'm not suggesting some kind of fallaciously-naturalistic position that "natural" chemicals are "good" and that "synthetic" chemicals are "bad". I'm arguing that there is a widely-accepted definition of the word "natural" in bodybuilding, which accomodates the use of protein supplements but excludes the misuse of prescription-only pharmaceuticals.


I too have no morale stance on this, you may notice that all I have done is either made counter statements, or provocative questions. I haven't stated my opinion, because I don't have one.

Years ago it was easier, all we had was milk and egg protein powders, desiccated liver, and a few aminos, and anabolic steroids. Those who took gear and those who didn't.

Nowadays, with so many products, and some with great muscle building potential, it's not so easy to draw that line. In the future the line will become even more blurred.

To prove my point, which is absolutely relevant to this thread, is look at the nattys of yesteryear, and the nattys today. Today's natty's are phenominal by comparison, and it's all down to the products they 'CAN' consume. But it's the 'CAN' that differs by opinion.


----------



## DarkTranquility (Jul 30, 2010)

hilly said:


> Not at all. taking in normal levels thru food is natural. taking in a boatload thats been manufactured/changed and alterd in a lab is not. thats a fact mate no getting around it.
> 
> I also dont agree with the first part. just because its widely understood doesnt change the fact that if you are natural you dont take UNNATURAL substances. wether they are steroids/pro hormones/creatine and all the other stuff joe listed


Words have different definitions depending on the content. We're arguing about two different definitions of the word "natural". You're saying that the definitions we should use in bodybuilding should be as literal as possible.

OK, supposing we go with that, how useful would it be as a term? Natural would mean "of-nature only, not artificial" and would exclude anything processed-artificially, including nearly all the foods we eat. Therefore, nobody in bodybuilding (or anywhere) would be "natural", so what is the point in the term? It would be useless because we'd never be able to use it!

"Natural", as defined in my post above, is useful as a term and understood by everyone.


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

DarkTranquility said:


> Words have different definitions depending on the content. We're arguing about two different definitions of the word "natural". You're saying that the definitions we should use in bodybuilding should be as literal as possible.
> 
> OK, supposing we go with that, how useful would it be as a term? Natural would mean "of-nature only, not artificial" and would exclude anything processed-artificially, including nearly all the foods we eat. Therefore, nobody in bodybuilding (or anywhere) would be "natural", so what is the point in the term? It would be useless because we'd never be able to use it!
> 
> "Natural", as defined in my post above, is useful as a term and understood by everyone.


  

This is becoming entertaining. Because we are all constructing word plays, thought provocation, arguments, and so on, when we all know pretty much what natty and un natty is

Unnatural

Takes exogenous testosterone or derivatives of testosterone.

Takes harsh or stimulant fat burners

Yohimbine

Ephedrine

T3

Clenbuterol

DNP

Takes Pharmaceutical testosterone boosters, and anti E's

Arimidex

Nolvedex

Clomid

HCG

Takes Exogenous insulin, HGH

Natural

Doesn't partake in the above


----------



## Jimmy1 (Aug 14, 2003)

lol

your worse than jw007


----------



## DarkTranquility (Jul 30, 2010)

Excellent points, BigJoe; I agree with many of the fancy pills and supplements you see on websites now, the line is somewhat indistinct. However, we were talking about standard protein powders. Regardless of the semantics, I (and I suspect most) wouldn't count this in the same category as anabolic steroids, etc.


----------



## DarkTranquility (Jul 30, 2010)

B|GJOE said:


> This is becoming entertaining. Because we are all constructing word plays, thought provocation, arguments, and so on, when we all know pretty much what natty and un natty is
> 
> Unnatural
> 
> ...


LOL I'll take it


----------



## Jimmy1 (Aug 14, 2003)

DT....joe likes to play devils advocate to get the point accross....


----------



## DarkTranquility (Jul 30, 2010)

Haha then I'm sure we'll have some fun, if futile, discussions  I like to do that too...


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

Jimmy said:


> DT....joe likes to play devils advocate to get the point accross....


I do :thumb:


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

SK-XO, could you please define what "unfair" means in this instant?

B|GJOE, yohimbe/yohimbine is allowed actually!!


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

Dawn said:


> SK-XO, could you please define what "unfair" means in this instant?
> 
> B|GJOE, yohimbe/yohimbine is allowed actually!!


Interesting!

Just supports my point about the particular banned list being the opinion of individuals. I'd say yohimbine should be on the banned list, but that's just my opinion, the same as the person who made the list.


----------



## musio (Jan 25, 2008)

hsmann87 said:


> 8. Keep the number of calories you eat relatively high. You must control your metabolism if you want to duplicate the success of the top drug-free bodybuilders. Keep your caloric intake relatively high. Make your body gear its metabolism up-and prevent it from ever gearing down. If you have an average or slower metabolism, eat a lot of food and do a lot of cardiovascular training to keep your metabolism running hotter and more efficiently. If you have a faster metabolism, you must be extremely
> 
> committed to eating frequent meals that contain more nutrient-dense calories.


I found this quite interesting - could anyone care to expand on this? Is being under or over maintenance (for cutting and bulking respectively) by eating high and doing cardio better than just controlling diet?

To how much of an extent do you think eating high cals affect metabolism?


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

B|GJOE said:


> This is becoming entertaining. Because we are all constructing word plays, thought provocation, arguments, and so on, when we all know pretty much what natty and un natty is
> 
> Unnatural
> 
> ...


GLEN DANBURY uses insulin (has admitted as much himself) :cursing: :cursing:

AND competes in BNBF

Dirty ROIDING SCUM:cursing: :cursing: :cursing:


----------



## Themanabolic (Jun 25, 2009)

jw007 said:


> GLEN DANBURY uses insulin (has admitted as much himself) :cursing: :cursing:
> 
> AND competes in BNBF
> 
> Dirty ROIDING SCUM:cursing: :cursing: :cursing:


is he not diabetic ? :lol: :lol:


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

Themanabolic said:


> is he not diabetic ? :lol: :lol:


Yeah he reckons:whistling:

SO???

Im on TRT due to low test levels, SO now I have a licence to compete in BNBF


----------



## Themanabolic (Jun 25, 2009)

jw007 said:


> Yeah he reckons:whistling:
> 
> SO???
> 
> Im on TRT due to low test levels, SO now I have a licence to compete in BNBF


Yeah I see how it can be manipulated,

Isn't your TRT around 1.5g/week though?? :thumb:


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

jw007 said:


> Yeah he reckons:whistling:
> 
> SO???
> 
> Im on TRT due to low test levels, SO now I have a licence to compete in BNBF


I've got lumps in my moobs and the doc gave me tamoxifen

I'm nearing 40, had my T checked and it is low, so the doc gives me a shot of sustanon 250 every 2 weeks.

I've got type 1 diabetes, so have to jack insulin 3 times a day

Oh and did I mention I've got GHD which my friendly doc fixes with daily HGH shots.

Can I do the BNBF?


----------



## Greyphantom (Oct 23, 2003)

B|GJOE said:


> I've got lumps in my moobs and the doc gave me tamoxifen
> 
> I'm nearing 40, had my T checked and it is low, so the doc gives me a shot of sustanon 250 every 2 weeks.
> 
> ...


Dont know if you can do the BNBF but I sure as hell know I want YOUR Doc...


----------



## SK-XO (Aug 6, 2009)

Dawn said:


> SK-XO, could you please define what "unfair" means in this instant?
> 
> B|GJOE, yohimbe/yohimbine is allowed actually!!


Just meaning in general not a specific example. Because it makes me think well why is say ephedra or sida cordifolia banned? well im sure sida is anyway, but yohimbine isn't? it's just all quite misleading how random things are banned but others are not. Im not saying things shouldn't be banned just why things are banned and others are not?

And what I mean by unfair was just a fact not me but for example my pal wanted to compete but he took novedex by gaspari he bought it out of shops, now technically because hes taken that he won't be able to? now it's up to the person to check what is banned and whats not but it's all quite confusing, new things added to the list all of the time? and a lot of people would think that because you can buy it in the shops you wouldn't think it was banned, just my 2 cents.


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

green19210 said:


> I was only a thought and nothing that i have look into depth about (only being a first year).
> 
> But yes eating chicken is natural, pumping man made protein shakes isn't?


Protein shakes wont make your physique any better than lets say meat.

Why guys feel that shakes are superior to whole foods is beyond me.



pete-vtr said:


> IMO naturals are those that dont use ANY performance enhancing products of any kind.
> 
> so creatine, protein shakes, pro-hormones etc etc anything that contributes towards building muscle, So all those that claim to be natural and are comsuming these products are in fact just as natural as a steroid user. :whistling:


Protein and creatine are naturally occuring substances in lets say steak.

One pound of beef equals approximately 2 grams of creatine, and 4.6 grams can be found in every pound of herring.

If 5 grans is about all you can use, who says you cant get enough creatine in your body for maximum gains from these sources?



hsmann87 said:


> *8. Keep the number of calories you eat relatively high. You must control your metabolism if you want to duplicate the success of the top drug-free bodybuilders. Keep your caloric intake relatively high. Make your body gear its metabolism up-and prevent it from ever gearing down. If you have an average or slower metabolism, eat a lot of food and do a lot of cardiovascular training to keep your metabolism running hotter and more efficiently. If you have a faster metabolism, you must be extremely *
> 
> *
> committed to eating frequent meals that contain more nutrient-dense calories. *





musio said:


> I found this quite interesting - could anyone care to expand on this? Is being under or over maintenance (for cutting and bulking respectively) by eating high and doing cardio better than just controlling diet?
> 
> To how much of an extent do you think eating high cals affect metabolism?


Bro, this simply means, that doing alot of cardiovascular training with more food makes the fire of the metabolism hotter/faster, depending on your bodytype you can use this for your benefit or for the faster metabolism guys they need more frequent calorie dense food to keep the fire hot.


----------



## lordgeorge (Jun 30, 2010)

I thought that was a good post. I have no problem with steroid users at all it's

all personal choice, but I reckon they should be left alone until you really can't get bigger or stronger naturally, this bodybuilding game takes patience I'm just starting out, but

I like the feeling that I've stepped onto a path to something really worthwhile.

perhaps oneday I'll try them who knows


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

Just looking at some images from the Welsh BNBF 2010. I have to say Mark Claxton the overall winner is a phenomenal natty.

However, one competitor really caught my eye.

What do you guys think of this?


----------



## Jimmy1 (Aug 14, 2003)

jw007 said:


> Yeah he reckons:whistling:
> 
> SO???
> 
> Im on TRT due to low test levels, SO now I have a licence to compete in BNBF


great point


----------



## Jimmy1 (Aug 14, 2003)

B|GJOE said:


> Just looking at some images from the Welsh BNBF 2010. I have to say Mark Claxton the overall winner is a phenomenal natty.
> 
> However, one competitor really caught my eye.
> 
> What do you guys think of this?


i think he suffered with teenaged gyno, and now has a prescription for adex

you see...all completely above board 

one point to consider.....isnt there a 5 year steroid free rule in some of the natty feds?


----------



## hsmann87 (Jun 22, 2010)

chilisi said:


> What is so bad, in your opinion, about people using steroids. 99% of Steroid users, start off natural, then go down the AAS route.
> 
> What is the big deal, if they want to take AAS and enter a competition?


Personally, I feel that its assisted and that it isnt a true show of someones feats. Presently, i can deadlift 230kg, but if i started taking a gram of tren every week it will shoot up to about 250kg lets say for arguments sake. Now that 20kg is because of the tren, not because of me. *This is what I feel though.* I know that there are many factors thrown into the mix and many arguments can be made out of it such that extra food will enable me to left more etc. But thats just me and its my thinking.

This is another reason why i dont use a belt or straps or wraps when lifting. As I feel that its the equipment that is helping me lift the weight, not my own raw power.

All of this is just what i personally feel. I have no disrespect for people who take aas. In fact i respect the **** out of them. Pinning yourself 5 odd times a day takes some balls. Big balls that i could probably never attain. My fave bodybuilder of all time is Coleman. And he juiced his bollocks off. However the inspiration i get from him is second to none. I am more inspired from bb'ers like coleman and kai greene than from any natty out there, but I know i will never be as big as them. But i can live with that. Im comfortable with it.

Its just me. I cant fully explain it...its wierd, but hopefully the above gives some sort of explanation. :beer:


----------



## rodrigo (Jun 29, 2009)

B|GJOE said:


> Just looking at some images from the Welsh BNBF 2010. I have to say Mark Claxton the overall winner is a phenomenal natty.
> 
> However, one competitor really caught my eye.
> 
> What do you guys think of this?


 :confused1:moobs


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

I have seen some natty guys grow better than some of the assisted dudes, all down to genetics.

Is that fair? :lol:

I have seen guys with 20 inch arms, I could never get that with gear or anything.


----------



## hsmann87 (Jun 22, 2010)

hackskii said:


> I have seen some natty guys grow better than some of the assisted dudes, all down to genetics.
> 
> Is that fair? :lol:
> 
> I have seen guys with 20 inch arms, I could never get that with gear or anything.


 true. but there is a large difference between having 20 inch arms like this:



(probably not 20 inch but you get my drift)

and 20 inch arms like this:


----------



## Kezz (Sep 3, 2007)

Ronnie is hot!!!


----------

