# Illusions and myths shattered.



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

Im going to have my Sunday dinner then put to bed and shatter a lot of myths about gaining muscle and bodybuilding in this thread.


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

My preference has been updated..Following ..


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

This should sum it up nicely - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1B5T7eDfzMt_qUoRg2Er3GWmwapRvZfaZq06PPJfs3Ng/preview


----------



## barksie (Nov 23, 2014)

hurry up then


----------



## FelonE1 (Dec 23, 2013)

On the edge of my seat


----------



## barksie (Nov 23, 2014)

i'll just go and read all the Q and A's with the pro's over at muscular development ,


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

Dark sim said:


> This should sum it up nicely - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1B5T7eDfzMt_qUoRg2Er3GWmwapRvZfaZq06PPJfs3Ng/preview


 Nice


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Roast beef or chicken?


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

Strength/reps/routine isn't important - just fatigue the muscle

diet is low carb/meat-veg to cut fat and more to bulk

Genetics are everything you know earlier whether it's worth pursuing

you don't need lots of drugs/high dosages

everything you can learn for free on the internet

pts are snake oil salesmen

bodybuilding is simple

Pretty much sums up everything I've ever seen you post that's not trolling


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

Here we go

1. Muscle is temporary, no matter how much you gain, natty or otherwise your body doesnt want it and will do everything it can to get rid of it.

2. If you take gear for ten years straight and come off you will end up looking exactly the same as you would have training natty for ten years after around 9mths to a year.

3. You cannot retain the muscle you had using no matter what you do, you can either accept the inevitable shrinkage or do what most people with fragile egos do, thats eat in excess and get fat. (the "muscle turns to fat statement" is based on this phenomenon)


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

banzi said:


> Here we go
> 
> 1. Muscle is temporary, no matter how much you gain, natty or otherwise your body doesnt want it and will do everything it can to get rid of it.
> 
> ...


 Any studies to verify?


----------



## ILLBehaviour (Dec 20, 2014)

I've seen you say all this before. What else you got ?


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

Dark sim said:


> Any studies to verify?


 Nope, people will find out for themselves and look back and remember me.

I would rather not just Google someone else's info and post it, its lazy.


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

ILLBehaviour said:


> I've seen you say all this before. What else you got ?


 People who dont post pics almost always look like s**t.


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

Dark sim said:


> Any studies to verify?


 Science can be flawed, experiences can not be  .

Loved this line by Mingster


----------



## bjaminny (Jan 3, 2015)

banzi said:


> Im going to have my Sunday dinner then put to bed and shatter a lot of myths about gaining muscle and bodybuilding in this thread.


 I'm in!


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

Jatin Bhatia said:


> Science can be flawed, experiences can not be  .
> 
> Loved this line by Mingster


 It was sarcasm mate


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

Dark sim said:


> It was sarcasm mate


 I am slow tonight


----------



## ILLBehaviour (Dec 20, 2014)

banzi said:


> People who dont post pics almost always look like s**t.


 that's not a myth of bodybuilding and muscle building though is it?


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

ILLBehaviour said:


> that's not a myth of bodybuilding and muscle building though is it?


 Your right, its a fact.


----------



## Mingster (Mar 25, 2011)

Jatin Bhatia said:


> Science can be flawed, experiences can not be  .
> 
> Loved this line by Mingster


 I'm not sure if that was an exact quote but I'm not a great fan of science it has to be said.

Very few studies accurately represent real life situations.


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

Mingster said:


> I'm not sure if that was an exact quote but I'm not a great fan of science it has to be said.
> 
> Very few studies *accurately represent real life situations.*


 True. Studies can be a reference point, it's on us to apply and see.

And, regarding the quote, it was exactly the same barring some grammatical differences. I don't miss the wise things anywhere.


----------



## ILLBehaviour (Dec 20, 2014)

banzi said:


> Your right, its a fact.


 so we're agreed its not a myth of bodybuilding and musclebuilding. So tell us more about these myths you promised in your initial post.


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

Mingster said:


> I'm not sure if that was an exact quote but I'm not a great fan of science it has to be said.
> 
> Very few studies accurately represent real life situations.


 a study says that 99 people out of 100 made gains eating xxxxxxx.

Doesnt help the 1 guy at all.


----------



## barksie (Nov 23, 2014)

banzi said:


> Here we go
> 
> 1. Muscle is temporary, no matter how much you gain, natty or otherwise your body doesnt want it and will do everything it can to get rid of it.
> 
> ...


 kinell yu said all this before, taxi!!!


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

barksie said:


> kinell yu said all this before, taxi!!!


 Just going to do this, be back in 5, if I remember.

https://www.givetocure.org/blogs/test-alz?gclid=COz-oe6j5soCFQeVGwod-rQCbw


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

Train 1 year natty, train 2 years cycling, then a year on totally, then add in growth hormone, if after another year ( 5 years in total) you are not knocking on the door to turn pro its very unlikely to happen.


----------



## UK2USA (Jan 30, 2016)

Forget all that science and studies bollix, go with what works, and I saw this work every Saturday morning as a kid. I'm gonna be huge!


----------



## bottleneck25 (Sep 25, 2009)

Steroids don't make your dick small . you had that to begin with. Steroids are just an excuse


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

unless you get down to 5% BF you will never know how much real quality tissue you have.


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

banzi said:


> unless you get down to 5% BF you will never know how much real quality tissue you have.


 Read my link, steal some of them myths, as you appear to be struggling...


----------



## Jammy Dodger (Nov 2, 2014)

Dark sim said:


> This should sum it up nicely - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1B5T7eDfzMt_qUoRg2Er3GWmwapRvZfaZq06PPJfs3Ng/preview


 May I asked if you compiled that? It's quite interesting and whoever put it together knows there stuff.


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

sammym said:


> May I asked if you compiled that? It's quite interesting and whoever put it together knows there stuff.


 Either Layne Norton or Alan Aragon, can't remember.


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

Dark sim said:


> Read my link, steal some of them myths, as you appear to be struggling...


 its more than you have ever come up with all the time I have been at this forum, you post more links than @TommyBananas


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

banzi said:


> Here we go
> 
> 1. Muscle is temporary, no matter how much you gain, natty or otherwise your body doesnt want it and will do everything it can to get rid of it.
> 
> ...


 Because your natural test levels can't support the muscle growth...pffff give us something we don't know


----------



## JUICE1 (Jan 28, 2016)

Mingster said:


> I'm not sure if that was an exact quote but I'm not a great fan of science it has to be said.
> 
> Very few studies accurately represent real life situations.


 You're not a great fan of science?

Dude everything around you is here because of Science.

The food that you eat, the clothes on your back, the keyboard you're typing on to send information across the world in seconds...

I really don't get how you can not be a fan of Science, it's the only true avenue for pursuit of knowledge and information.


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

JUICE1 said:


> You're not a great fan of science?
> 
> Dude everything around you is here because of Science.
> 
> ...


 @TommyBananas is abig fan of science, he regularly posts links to scientific studies and data

Yet he looks distinctly average.

I know people eating like monks and taking huge dosages that look a mess, can you tell me why science says they should look fantastic?


----------



## JUICE1 (Jan 28, 2016)

banzi said:


> @TommyBananas is abig fan of science, he regularly posts links to scientific studies and data
> 
> Yet he looks distinctly average.
> 
> I know people eating like monks and taking huge dosages that look a mess, can you tell me why science says they should look fantastic?


 I never proposed Science should make them look fantastic.


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

JUICE1 said:


> I never proposed Science should make them look fantastic.


 each person responds differently to outside stimulus, science doesn't apply to all equally.

Stop dodging the point.


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

JUICE1 said:


> You're not a great fan of science?
> 
> Dude everything around you is here because of Science.
> 
> ...


 Oh and its what makes muscles grow...lol


----------



## bigchickenlover (Jul 16, 2013)

There is no reason to be alive if you cant do deadlift...

"Jon Pall Sigmarrson"

Fact not myth


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Acidreflux said:


> Because your *natural test levels can't support the muscle growth*...pffff give us something we don't know


 I seem to do ok


----------



## Major Eyeswater (Nov 2, 2013)

JUICE1 said:


> You're not a great fan of science?
> 
> Dude everything around you is here because of Science.
> 
> ...


 I love it when people go "what has science ever done for us" using a touch-sensitive screen on a smartphone that is wirelessly connected to a global network of supercomputers.

Having said that, the fundamental problem of trying to investigate bodybuilding scientifically is that there are too many variables. The scientific process tends to rely on isolating variables and testing them one at a time - so you get studies that test for 1 set to failure versus 5 sets not to failure, or comparing 2g/kg protein to 3g/kg.

In bodybuilding, the single biggest determinants in your progress are your genetic ability to gain muscle, and the amount of effort you put into your training - and these are not factors that can be controlled for in a lab. Compared to these, the detail of whether you work with higher or lower reps, or have a shake instead of a cheese sandwich become fairly inconsequential.


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Ill take science over religion (blind faith) every time.


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

And the most disappointing thread of the year goes to.....


----------



## Mingster (Mar 25, 2011)

JUICE1 said:


> You're not a great fan of science?
> 
> Dude everything around you is here because of Science.
> 
> ...


 Science in weightlifting, not the world in general. Although I could use Higgs Boson...

Studies to do with weightlifting are generally flawed. They are performed on rats, have a miniscule test group, have a test group that is unrepresentative of the general weightlifting population. The test group are not monitored equally: some use better form than others, some cheat, have extra meals away from the testing and so on.

The study that shows a group will put on muscle without training whilst on testosterone is a prime example. There are enough people on here that do train and still don't add muscle whilst on cycle to counter that.

Science than involves human beings is unpredictable. Even the ranges used in medical tests, including blood tests, don't apply to all.


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Mingster said:


> Science in weightlifting, not the world in general. Although I could use Higgs Boson...
> 
> Studies to do with weightlifting are generally flawed. They are performed on rats, have a miniscule test group, have a test group that is unrepresentative of the general weightlifting population. The test group are not monitored equally: some use better form than others, some cheat, have extra meals away from the testing and so on.
> 
> The study that shows a group will put on muscle without training whilst on testosterone is a prime example. *There are enough people on here that do train and still don't add muscle whilst on cycle to counter that.*


 On gear off gear it don't matter... if you train and eat correctly you will gain muscle. it is how the body is programmed.


----------



## JUICE1 (Jan 28, 2016)

banzi said:


> each person responds differently to outside stimulus, science doesn't apply to all equally.
> 
> Stop dodging the point.


 What point? I didn't even originally respond to you dude.



Mingster said:


> Science in weightlifting, not the world in general. Although I could use Higgs Boson...
> 
> Studies to do with weightlifting are generally flawed. They are performed on rats, have a miniscule test group, have a test group that is unrepresentative of the general weightlifting population. The test group are not monitored equally: some use better form than others, some cheat, have extra meals away from the testing and so on.
> 
> The study that shows a group will put on muscle without training whilst on testosterone is a prime example. There are enough people on here that do train and still don't add muscle whilst on cycle to counter that.


 I totally agree but that doesn't mean Science in weight lifting is inherently bad it just needs to be improved.


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

JUICE1 said:


> What point? I didn't even originally respond to you dude.
> 
> I totally agree but that doesn't mean Science in weight lifting is inherently bad it just needs to be improved.


 How much time it has been since you have started training?


----------



## Gnats Chuff (Oct 27, 2015)

banzi said:


> @TommyBananas is abig fan of science, he regularly posts links to scientific studies and data
> 
> Yet he looks distinctly average.


 Think you're giving a little too much credit there tbh.


----------



## JUICE1 (Jan 28, 2016)

Jatin Bhatia said:


> How much time it has been since you have started training?


 Totally irrelevant question.


----------



## ILLBehaviour (Dec 20, 2014)

poor Tommy, hes not even here to post a link to a study paper in his defence.


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

JUICE1 said:


> Totally irrelevant question.


 Do you read minds?. Anyways, your answer give me the hint that you are not worth of *my views*. Good day 

EDIT :- DISCUSSION


----------



## mal (Dec 31, 2009)

no need to re-invent the wheel, guys were piling on the mass/muscle long before the internet...all these

pubmed studies are usually from tests on animals and are no relevance to tried and tested methods

even the human studies would have been mostly done on your average guy on the street not a

seasoned bodybuilder using ass/gh/slin etc.


----------



## JUICE1 (Jan 28, 2016)

Jatin Bhatia said:


> Do you read minds?. Anyways, your answer give me the hint that you are not worth of my views. Good day


 Maybe one day I'll be blessed enough to hear your amazing views. Lol jog on.


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

JUICE1 said:


> Maybe one day I'll be blessed enough to hear your amazing views. Lol jog on.


 Till then you have my permission to look average


----------



## JUICE1 (Jan 28, 2016)

Jatin Bhatia said:


> Till then you have my permission to look average


 I do look average. Once again, totally irrelevant to what I'm saying.


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

JUICE1 said:


> What point? I didn't even originally respond to you dude.
> 
> I totally agree but that doesn't mean Science in weight lifting is inherently bad it just needs to be improved.


 Is it really science or just an understanding of how the body responds to resistance training then manipulating those responses. This can be achieved by a novice through time via trial and error.

Then throw peds into the equasion which just fck everything up.


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

JUICE1 said:


> I do look average. Once again, totally irrelevant to what I'm saying.


 Ok


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

ILLBehaviour said:


> poor Tommy, hes not even here to post a link to a study paper in his defence.


 He cannot at the moment....


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

Natty Steve'o said:


> On gear off gear it don't matter... if you train and eat correctly you will gain muscle. it is how the body is programmed.


 however some respond far better than others.

His point is that some people respond to just taking testosterone and sitting on their asses, they dont even need to train, and yet some take test train like animals and still dont respond.

How does science explain that?


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

JUICE1 said:


> Totally irrelevant question.


 I think he is trying to establish how much real world experience you have, you picked up on that and as such have dodged the question.


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

JUICE1 said:


> I do look average. Once again, totally irrelevant to what I'm saying.


 why dont you apply science and look spectacular?


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

banzi said:


> however some respond far better than others.
> 
> His point is that some people respond to just taking testosterone and sitting on their asses, they dont even need to train, and yet some take test train like animals and still dont respond.
> 
> How does science explain that?


 Because in that study the individuals had never lifted a weight before in their life.

Do you even read?


----------



## nitrogen (Oct 25, 2007)

banzi said:


> Im going to have my Sunday dinner then put to bed and shatter a lot of *myths about* gaining muscle and *bodybuilding* in this thread.


 I presume bb shows are included under this subject.

Do you think that muscle mass, condition, proportionality etc.the overall "quality" of muscle/ body development matters during judging or is it a myth?


----------



## JUICE1 (Jan 28, 2016)

banzi said:


> why dont you apply science and look spectacular?


 I don't really follow weight lifting studies, I just eat and lift. I'm merely stating that denouncing Science is a ridiculous thing to do.


----------



## Mingster (Mar 25, 2011)

JUICE1 said:


> I don't really follow weight lifting studies, I just eat and lift. I'm merely stating that denouncing Science is a ridiculous thing to do.


 Saying 'I'm not a big fan of science(in weightlifting)' is hardly denouncing science.

I'm not a big fan of getting up to go to work in the morning either, but I not declaring it to 'be wrong or evil' either.

Scientists need a sense of proportion


----------



## JUICE1 (Jan 28, 2016)

Mingster said:


> Saying 'I'm not a big fan of science(in weightlifting)' is hardly denouncing science.
> 
> I'm not a big fan of getting up to go to work in the morning either, but I not declaring it to 'be wrong or evil' either.
> 
> Scientists need a sense of proportion


 I guess I took what you said too literally.


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

TRT Please !!


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

Drogon said:


> Because in that study the individuals had never lifted a weight before in their life.
> 
> Do you even read?


 which further validates the point that studies are essentially pointless


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

banzi said:


> which further validates the point that studies are essentially pointless


 No it showed what happens when people who don't lift take exogenous hormones...the purpose of the study.


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

JUICE1 said:


> I don't really follow weight lifting studies, *I just eat and lift*. I'm merely stating that denouncing Science is a ridiculous thing to do.


 You need to count macros and get yourself a phone app.

Thats way too basic mate.


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

Drogon said:


> No it showed what happens when people who don't lift take exogenous hormones...the purpose of the study.


 yes, it shows they gain more than some people do who take them and lift.

amazing isnt it.


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

banzi said:


> yes, it shows they gain more than some people do who take them and lift.
> 
> amazing isnt it.


 But the people who take them and lift have usually lifted for a while/exhausted noob gains/built a foundation.

If someone never trained and hopped on exogenous hormones AND trained as opposed to just being on more test, the former would gain much more muscle.

Give someone like yourself 600mg test and stop training, I suspect you would barely see any difference in 6 weeks with potential for actual loss the more time goes on.


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

banzi said:


> however some respond far better than others.
> 
> His point is that some people respond to just taking testosterone and sitting on their asses, they dont even need to train, and* yet some take test train like animals and still dont respond.*
> 
> *How does science explain that?*


 Bunk gear. ...lol

At the end of the day I will stand by my statement. With or without the use of ASS if a person trains and eats correctly they give their body no choice but to respond to the stresses it is being subject to, resulting in growth.

I am also in full agreement that no two people will respond in the same way. There can be a vast variation between individuals which I would say comes down to their genetic make up. (science)...


----------



## Mingster (Mar 25, 2011)

Natty Steve'o said:


> There can be a vast variation between individuals which I would say comes down to their genetic make up. (science)...


 This is very true.

I have also seen two guys take the exact same gear, train together, eat together, the works and the changes in their physiques has been totally different.


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

Drogon said:


> And the most disappointing thread of the year goes to.....


 One of mine was worse, no one replied to it lol.


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

banzi said:


> its more than you have ever come up with all the time I have been at this forum, you post more links than @TommyBananas


 What would you know stuck in gen con...?


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

Dark sim said:


> One of mine was worse, no one replied to it lol.


 Awwwwwwwwwww.

Which one?


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

Drogon said:


> Awwwwwwwwwww.
> 
> Which one?


 Sports day school records. Clearly no athletes on the forum lol.


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Dark sim said:


> *Sports day school records*. Clearly no athletes on the forum lol.


 3 legged race?


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

Natty Steve'o said:


> 3 legged race?


 Egg and spoon.


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

Natty Steve'o said:


> I seem to do ok


 Hmmm Dorian yates... not so good, you cant beat farther time.


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

Drogon said:


> But the people who take them and lift have usually lifted for a while/exhausted noob gains/built a foundation.
> 
> *If someone never trained and hopped on exogenous hormones AND trained as opposed to just being on more test, the former would gain much more muscle.*
> 
> Give someone like yourself 600mg test and stop training, I suspect you would barely see any difference in 6 weeks with potential for actual loss the more time goes on.


 I thought you had read the study?


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Acidreflux said:


> Hmmm Dorian yates... not so good, you cant beat farther time.


 How d you know my second name is Yates?


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

banzi said:


> I thought you had read the study?


 nope, just going against what you say for fun, regardless...


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

Drogon said:


> nope, just going against what you say for fun, regardless...


 trolls need to study their subject if they want to successfully misquote it.


----------



## Mark2021 (Apr 13, 2012)

Talk about something decent sakeeees


----------



## iamyou (Oct 29, 2012)

banzi said:


> Here we go
> 
> 1. Muscle is temporary, no matter how much you gain, natty or otherwise your body doesnt want it and will do everything it can to get rid of it.
> 
> ...


 Okay you come off AAS, but you stay on 10 IUs of growth. You wanna tell me you're still going to lose all of your gains?


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

banzi said:


> trolls need to study their subject if they want to successfully misquote it.


 Are you not aware of my workload?


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

iamyou said:


> Okay you come off AAS, but you stay on 10 IUs of growth. You wanna tell me you're still going to lose all of *your *gains?


 They are not YOUR gains they are the chemicals gains. If you could keep them then they would be yours.....


----------



## iamyou (Oct 29, 2012)

banzi said:


> unless you get down to 5% BF you will never know how much real quality tissue you have.


 Yeah well unless you ...um get a dexa scan done or something


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

Well there's lots of evidence to suggest that you actually create receptors with prolonged AAS use which do not go away upon cessation therefore theoretically increasing natty potential once off (more-so than if you never touched gear).


----------



## iamyou (Oct 29, 2012)

Natty Steve'o said:


> They are not YOUR gains they are the chemicals gains. *If you could keep them then they would be yours.....  *


 I can keep them by injecting growth hormone which is also produced naturally by my body. It's no different than taking extra creating or even food. Actually your body doesn't produce either of those itself so shooting HGH is more natural than eating food


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

you also create test in the body your argument is flawed.


----------



## iamyou (Oct 29, 2012)

Natty Steve'o said:


> you also create test in the body your argument is flawed.


 No it makes perfect sense. I am basically more natty than you are LMAO

had too much zopiclone today...


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

iamyou said:


> No it makes perfect sense.* I am basically more natty than you are LMAO*
> 
> had too much zopiclone today...


 Impossible...I am pure.


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

iamyou said:


> Okay you come off AAS, but you stay on 10 IUs of growth. You wanna tell me you're still going to lose all of your gains?


 I class growth as gear, even though I have no intention of ever using it.


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

Natty Steve'o said:


> They are not YOUR gains they are the chemicals gains. *If you could keep them then they would be yours..*...


 natty gains still disappear when you stop training.


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

banzi said:


> natty gains still disappear when you stop training.


 True


----------



## Sphinkter (Apr 10, 2015)

Natty Steve'o said:


> Bunk gear. ...lol
> 
> At the end of the day I will stand by my statement. With or without the use of *ASS* if a person trains and eats correctly they give their body no choice but to respond to the stresses it is being subject to, resulting in growth.
> 
> I am also in full agreement that no two people will respond in the same way. There can be a vast variation between individuals which I would say comes down to their genetic make up. (science)...


 Autocorrect at its finest lol


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Sphinkter said:


> Autocorrect at its finest lol


 You obviously do not pay attention... :whistling:


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

Natty Steve'o said:


> How d you know my second name is Yates?


 I know everything that's why I'm on this forum...


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Acidreflux said:


> I know everything that's why I'm on this forum...


 You could be wrong....


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

Natty Steve'o said:


> You could be wrong....


 No I calculate everything using proven exact science teqniques...pretty simple really


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Acidreflux said:


> No I calculate everything using proven exact science teqniques...pretty simple really


 Can you expand on this?


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

Natty Steve'o said:


> Can you expand on this?


 Follow this proven basic plan to keep all your gains and burn fat yeah round...This came from the man himself no other than Mike Ohearn the power body builder!

Day 1 Stock up on bovril if you cant get any oxo cubes can be used..

Next stock up on Polo mints and aspirin.

Breakfast 3 cups of bovril

Lunch 3 cups of bovril

Dinner 3 cups of bovril

Now here comes the scientific part before training have 1 cup of bovril 2 polo's and an asprin...

Repeat this after training and sleep within one hour post training.

Stick to that for one year then turn pro :thumb


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Acidreflux said:


> Follow this proven basic plan to keep all your gains and burn fat yeah round...This came from the man himself no other than Mike Ohearn the power body builder!
> 
> Day 1 Stock up on bovril if you cant get any oxo cubes can be used..
> 
> ...


 I see some of my methodology in this post.... I do not use bovril as marmite is far superior. polos and aspirin as described above. This is real top secret info right here on UKM


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

Natty Steve'o said:


> I see some of my methodology in this post.... I do not use bovril as marmite is far superior. polos and aspirin as described above. This is real top secret info right here on UKM


 Don't tell everyone? ?


----------



## iamyou (Oct 29, 2012)

banzi said:


> natty gains still disappear when you stop training.


 My mind is completely blown by the secret truths you've finally decided to reveal to us.

So all banzi knows about is losing gains lol


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

Natty Steve'o said:


> I see some of my methodology in this post.... I do not use bovril as marmite is far superior. polos and aspirin as described above. This is real top secret info right here on UKM





Acidreflux said:


> Don't tell everyone? ?


 I read that regarding bovril, is it really true?. I ignored the article thought it was bogus


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Jatin Bhatia said:


> I read that regarding bovril, is it really true?. I ignored the article thought it was bogus


 it is supposed to be true,

full of good micronutrient ...


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

Natty Steve'o said:


> it is supposed to be true,
> 
> full of good micronutrient ...


 If i remember correctly, this stuff was quite high in sodium. What;s the point adding polo mint?


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

It tastes nice LOL sugar...


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

Jatin Bhatia said:


> I read that regarding bovril, is it really true?. I ignored the article thought it was bogus


 Bogus dude forget everything you read....


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

Jatin Bhatia said:


> If i remember correctly, this stuff was quite high in sodium. What;s the point adding polo mint?


 Freshen your breath after all that bovril...


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

sodium is king for making you swole...

Water retention....


----------



## Sphinkter (Apr 10, 2015)

Natty Steve'o said:


> You obviously do not pay attention... :whistling:


 How?


----------



## RUDESTEW (Mar 28, 2015)

Its true , iv missed three workouts ( not missed one in 18 months untill now) because of back/rib/ab/falling apart pain and everything is smaller apart from my belly . Its ok being old n bold when your beefy but not weedy . The kids in the street i told off over the years are already eyeing me up ready for the kill little c**ts.


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Sphinkter said:


> How?


 Its ok you are quite new to the forum....ASS is what I call it....


----------



## Sphinkter (Apr 10, 2015)

Natty Steve'o said:


> Its ok you are quite new to the forum....ASS is what I call it....


 Damnit I'll need to delete my "where can I get some ass" thread before I get banned for discussing sources


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Sphinkter said:


> Damnit I'll need to delete my "where can I get some ass" thread before I get banned for discussing sources


 LOL :thumbup1:


----------



## monkeybiker (Jul 21, 2010)

Natty Steve'o said:


> 3 legged race?


 I used to enter that race by myself :lol:


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

monkeybiker said:


> I used to enter that race by myself :lol:


 And still came 2nd


----------



## FelonE1 (Dec 23, 2013)

monkeybiker said:


> I used to enter that race by myself :lol:


 Are you from Cornwall?


----------



## monkeybiker (Jul 21, 2010)

Natty Steve'o said:


> And still came 2nd


 :crying:


----------



## monkeybiker (Jul 21, 2010)

FelonE said:


> Are you from Cornwall?


 No


----------



## FelonE1 (Dec 23, 2013)

monkeybiker said:


> No


 Ok


----------



## dannythinx (Oct 4, 2014)

For what it's worth I'm just going to chime in here.

according to Dorian Yates it's pretty easy to keep what you have in the way of gains the hard bit is making new gains


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/drobson50.htm great one for beginners

But I'm still waiting for @banzi to clear up all these myths and illusions? ?? That roast dinner must be huge he's been eating it for 3 days!


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

Acidreflux said:


> http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/drobson50.htm great one for beginners
> 
> But I'm still waiting for @banzi to clear up all these myths and illusions? ?? That roast dinner must be huge he's been eating it for 3 days!


 lol at those 10, you can make gains and ignore every single one of them


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

banzi said:


> lol at those 10, you can make gains and ignore every single one of them


 Still seven more than you posted....and you started the thread?


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

Acidreflux said:


> Still seven more than you posted....and you started the thread?


 try and find some more using Google.

I'm busy looking awesome at the moment.


----------



## 25434 (Dec 27, 2011)

When I left school and discovered that you don't get 6 weeks off in the summer. That really shattered my dreams, I had no idea. I was also somewhat perturbed when I realised that boobs did not grow straight out as they looked like in the films, one had to wear a bra, I had no idea. I think I was a late bloomer, haha


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

banzi said:


> try and find some more using Google.
> 
> I'm busy looking awesome at the moment.


 Looking awesome in your 1980s body building days... Bodybuilding.com is way more informative.


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

Acidreflux said:


> Looking awesome in your 1980s body building days... *Bodybuilding.com is way more informative.*


 http://www.bodybuilding.com

bye


----------



## Gary29 (Aug 21, 2011)

Flubs said:


> When I left school and discovered that you don't get 6 weeks off in the summer. That really shattered my dreams, I had no idea. I was also somewhat perturbed when I realised that boobs did not grow straight out as they looked like in the films, one had to wear a bra, I had no idea. I think I was a late bloomer, haha


 You should've become a teacher.


----------



## 25434 (Dec 27, 2011)

Gary29 said:


> You should've become a teacher.


 I did.


----------



## trey1 (Aug 10, 2015)

banzi said:


> Im going to have my Sunday dinner then put to bed and shatter a lot of myths about gaining muscle and bodybuilding in this thread.


 do u think steroids r needed to look really good, or do yu think it can be done natural? thanks


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

trey1 said:


> do u think steroids r needed to look really good, or do yu think it can be done natural? thanks


 It can be done natty.


----------



## trey1 (Aug 10, 2015)

Natty Steve'o said:


> It can be done natty.


 thank you thats what im trying now


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

dannythinx said:


> For what it's worth I'm just going to chime in here.
> 
> according to Dorian Yates it's pretty easy to keep what you have in the way of gains the hard bit is making new gains


 Once gear use is stopped? Not a chance.

Why do the guys who hold more muscle typically cruise on what a typical gym rat will cycle on? To give them a chance of holding that muscle between blasts.


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

trey1 said:


> do u think steroids r needed to look really good, or do yu think it can be done natural? thanks


 Define really good?


----------



## trey1 (Aug 10, 2015)

Dark sim said:


> Define really good?


 good size, shape, definition,


----------



## Armitage Shanks (Jul 7, 2014)

The illusion... Is banzi awesome?

The myth is, he is!


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

trey1 said:


> good size, shape, definition,


 Still doesn't help. My idea of good size, shape, will be different to the next.


----------



## Frandeman (Mar 24, 2014)

Dark sim said:


> Define really good?


 I got this black guy in my gym...

I'll try take a picture of him whitout looking gay...

Doesn't have a clue about diet or gear seriusly.... I know him for 2 years...

Guy looks ready to compete on physique... Amazing


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

trey1 said:


> do u think steroids r needed to look really good, or do yu think it can be done natural? thanks


 You must be looking for a fight pal....


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

banzi said:


> http://www.bodybuilding.com
> 
> bye


 Where you going?


----------



## Frandeman (Mar 24, 2014)

Acidreflux said:


> Where you going?


 He is been baned from every bodybuilding forum but this one lol

He's going nowhere


----------



## Goranchero (Mar 26, 2015)

A very abstract question... How much of cycle gains could be water weight if one does not experience any symptoms associated with water retention?


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

Is higher protein intake really a supplement industry gimmick?.


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

Frandeman said:


> He is been baned from every bodybuilding forum but this one lol
> 
> He's going nowhere


 Hahaha now the truth is out there!!


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

Jatin Bhatia said:


> Is higher protein intake really a supplement industry gimmick?.


 It depends on how the whey is filtered...whey concentrate is pure junk that's why it's cheaper if its pure whey isolate then it's worth having as any other form has had all benefits from supplementing whey protein destroyed...


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

DatGuy said:


> Are you saying concentrate and casein etc contain 0 protein


 Why would i say that? There are other health benefits to supplementing whey protein... And better forms of whey protein.


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

DatGuy said:


> You said whey concentrate is pure junk and all benefits from supplementing with it have been destroyed so I assume you included the protein content within those destroyed benefits as that's what we use it for


 Whey concentrate is the pure junk of whey proteins...go do some reaserch before you buy a 5kg tub for 30 quid lol


----------



## Goranchero (Mar 26, 2015)

I am more inclined to believe that whey protein concentrate is superior to whey protein isolate despite isolate having more desirable macro values. Less processing and filtering, higher bioactivity.


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

Ok read this...then ask questions but remember we buy protein by weight!

*
Cold Filtered, Micro Filtered, Ultra Filtered, Ion Exchange - Whey Protein Processing Methods Explained
*










Whey protein is a by product of cheese manufacturing. During the process casein coagulates and separates leaving raw whey on top of the casein.

The whey undergoes various processing steps and it is these processing steps which determine the quality of the whey protein in the end product.

Two main methods are used to separate the protein from the rest of the whey, namely, filtration or ion exchange.

Ion exchange, proteins are separated based on their electrical charge. Hydrochloric acid and sodium hydroxide are used during this process. Because of this, whey protein fractions that are sensitive to pH are denatured, e.g. glycomacropeptides, immunoglobulins, lactoferrin, and alpha lactalbumin. This means that the structure of the protein is changed, so that its biological activity is reduced or completely eliminated.

Maintaining the natural undenatured state of the protein is essential to its immune-modulating activity. The protein must be processed under low temperature and/or low acid conditions as not to "denature" the protein. Keep in mind that the functional aspect of the protein is unchanged. The Ion Exchange process does not change the number of grams of protein in the product. From a physique or athletic standpoint you will not notice a difference in a protein that is denatured from one that has its biological factors intact.








Whey Concentrate is the least processed form of whey, and is 35-80% protein by weight. The processing of whey concentrate removes the water, lactose, ash, and some minerals. In addition, compared to whey isolates whey concentrate typically contains more biologically active components. The higher the protein content on a gram per gram basis, the more processing (filtering) is needed.

Whey protein concentrate goes through the ultra-filtration process, where the membranes of the filters are about one micrometer, which is amazingly small. To make whey protein isolate, you take the ultra-filtrated whey protein concentrate and you filter it again through micro-filtration, where these filters are 4 times smaller than the ultra-filters. Whey Protein Isolates will yield a protein content from 80-95% protein by weight.

Perhaps the most familiar micro filtered isolate would be CFM®. Although the term "cross flow micro filtered" is something of a generic term for several similar ways of processing whey, the CFM® processing method uses a low temperature micro filtration technique that allows for the production of very high protein contents which can be slightly above 90%, the retention of important sub fractions, extremely low fat and lactose contents, with virtually no undenatured proteins. CFM® is a natural, non-chemical process which employs high tech ceramic filters.

Another less popular process you may have heard of is Hydrolyzation. Hydrolyzed proteins can be processed using an acid process that can denature the biologically active parts of the protein. Hydrolyzation is a "pre-digestion" process which breaks proteins down into smaller chains. Some companies have started using a method for Hydrolyzing whey protein that uses an enzymatic process that does not denature the protein.



- See more at: http://performancenutritionblog.com/cold-filtered-micro-filtered-ultra-filtered-ion-exchange-whey-protein-processing-methods-explained/#sthash.VrE2qMRf.dpuf


----------



## 12 gauge (Jul 16, 2011)

Acidreflux said:


> Ok read this...then ask questions but remember we buy protein by weight!


 Yeah so a good concentrate is 80% protein, 80% of 1000 is 800 so 800 grams of protein per kg of concentrate.

whats the issue?


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

12 gauge said:


> Yeah so a good concentrate is 80% protein, 80% of 1000 is 800 so 800 grams of protein per kg of concentrate.
> 
> whats the issue?


 A good concentrate is 80% how'd you know its good?


----------



## 12 gauge (Jul 16, 2011)

Acidreflux said:


> A good concentrate is 80% how'd you know its good?


 How would you know an isolate is good?


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

Isolate is what it is...concentrate could be 35-80...


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

12 gauge said:


> How would you know an isolate is good?


 Because its guaranteed 80-95% you donut :thumb:


----------



## 12 gauge (Jul 16, 2011)

Acidreflux said:


> Isolate is what it is...concentrate could be 35-80...


 Independent lab tests can confirm the exact protein content on a gram for gram basis,


----------



## 12 gauge (Jul 16, 2011)

Acidreflux said:


> Because its guaranteed 80-95% you donut :thumb:


 Yes with less bio-availability, so your statement that concentrate is junk is based on the fact that it might be 35% protein by weight?


----------



## Sphinkter (Apr 10, 2015)

Acidreflux said:


> It depends on how the whey is filtered...whey concentrate is pure junk that's why it's cheaper if its pure whey isolate then it's worth having as any other form has had all benefits from supplementing whey protein destroyed...


 It's cheaper cause there is slightly less protein per gram than isolate. If you look at standard bulk powders/my protein whey concentrate its like 80% protein as opposed to their isolate which what 90 odd%? The only difference thats going to make is in your wallet.


----------



## 12 gauge (Jul 16, 2011)

Acidreflux said:


> Because its guaranteed 80-95% you donut :thumb:


 On that basis a concentrate is guaranteed to be what the supplier says it is

Most bulk suppliers provide lab results, here is the results of B.P whey concentrate

http://www.bulkpowders.co.uk/assets/coa/PureWheyProtein17062015.pdf

so around 80% according to the lab results nitrogen testing, in fact its 83% protein before flavouring and slightly less after flavoured with chocolate being around 75% due to added coco powder


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

12 gauge said:


> On that basis a concentrate is guaranteed to be what the supplier says it is
> 
> Most bulk suppliers provide lab results, here is the results of B.P whey concentrate
> 
> ...


*
Analysis
*



Optimum Nutrition performance whey -9,27%


Myprotein Impact whey -10,13%


Isopure Low carb -10,77%


Optimum Nutrition gold whey -12,24%


Nutrabolics Fighters food -14,86%


Metabolic dieet Myosin Protein -19,59%


Optimum Nutrition Platinum Hydrowhey -19,98%


Now 100% whey protein isolate -20,64%


Pure protein 100% whey -22,04%


Jarrow formulas Whey protein -22,26%


Kaizen 100% Whey Isolate -22,35%


Six Star Whey Isolate -20,59%


Musclepharm Combatpowder -24,60%


EAS 100% whey -25,22%


Trader joe's Trader darwin's Whey -27,82%


Gaspari Nutrition Myofosion -46,04%


Body Fortress Whey Protein -46,63%


American Pure Whey Casein -85,47%


American Pure Whey Whey Blend -99,37%


----------



## 12 gauge (Jul 16, 2011)

@Acidreflux

That shows that myprotein is about 65% of a claimed 72%, where did the figure 10/13% come from?

Post the source


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

12 gauge said:


> @Acidreflux
> 
> That shows that myprotein is about 65% of a claimed 72%, where did the figure 10/13% come from?
> 
> Post the source


 Multiple reads on average -10-13% less than stated on the label...


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

Acidreflux said:


> Ok read this...then ask questions but remember we buy protein by weight!
> 
> *
> Cold Filtered, Micro Filtered, Ultra Filtered, Ion Exchange - Whey Protein Processing Methods Explained
> ...


 TOMMYBANANASESQUE POST.


----------



## 12 gauge (Jul 16, 2011)

Acidreflux said:


> Multiple reads on average -10-13% less than stated on the label...


 @Acidreflux

Back to my original question if an unscrupulous supplier were to label something isolate how are you to know you are getting isolate at 95%? According to the test results you've posted even the isolates returned results of 60 to 70% you pancake. :lol:

So according to that myprotein concentrate has a higher percentage of protein than one of the isolates they tested.


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

12 gauge said:


> @Acidreflux
> 
> Back to my original question if an unscrupulous supplier were to label something isolate how are you to know you are getting isolate at 95%? According to the test results you've posted even the isolates returned results of 60 to 70% you pancake. :lol:
> 
> So according to that myprotein concentrate has a higher percentage of protein than one of the isolates they tested.


 Based on what the manufacturer states yeah if i would buy whey protien it would be.....isolate due to its superior quality. Your missing the point. I don't even buy this shite...


----------



## 12 gauge (Jul 16, 2011)

Acidreflux said:


> Based on what the manufacturer states yeah if i would buy whey protien it would be.....isolate due to its superior quality. Your missing the point. I don't even buy this shite...


 No, your point was that concentrate is junk because it could be as low as 35% protein, now according to the lab results you yourself have posted it shows that one isolate came back with less protein content than myprotein concentrate.

So how is isolate guaranteed to be 95% protein and why is concentrate which could be 80% protein junk in comparison?


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

12 gauge said:


> No, your point was that concentrate is junk because it could be as low as 35% protein, now according to the lab results you yourself have posted it shows that one isolate came back with less protein content than myprotein concentrate.
> 
> So how is isolate guaranteed to be 95% protein and why is concentrate which could be 80% protein junk in comparison?


 Simple quality...


----------



## 12 gauge (Jul 16, 2011)

Acidreflux said:


> Simple quality...


 simple question mate

What is your guarantee that you are getting 95% isolate? Why is 80% concentrate junk?


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

12 gauge said:


> simple question mate
> 
> What is your guarantee that you are getting 95% isolate? Why is 80% concentrate junk?


 The whey undergoes various processing steps and it is these processing steps which determine the quality of the whey protein in the end product.....The answer is quality.......


----------



## 12 gauge (Jul 16, 2011)

Acidreflux said:


> The whey undergoes various processing steps and it is these processing steps which determine the quality of the whey protein in the end product.....The answer is quality.......


 Yeah but the point is how are you guaranteed this quality?

I'll answer for you shall I?

You trust the supplier, unless you're prepared to fork out to get it tested yourself, so in the same way, people who buy concentrates trust the supplier is providing what is on the label and what their lab results indicate.

Assuming isolate is what it says it is and concentrate is the same and taking the bio availability and less processing aspect into consideration it makes a lot of sense to go for a concentrate from a reputable supplier.


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

12 gauge said:


> Yeah but the point is how are you guaranteed this quality?
> 
> I'll answer for you shall I?
> 
> ...


 You sound like your under the manufacturers spell mate, keep buying it.


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

The process grantees the quality...circles round and round.ffs


----------



## 12 gauge (Jul 16, 2011)

Acidreflux said:


> You sound like your under the manufacturers spell mate, keep buying it.


 Im under no illusions as to what whey is and what it can do for me as part of my nutritional/dietary intake, its a convenient economical source of protein, nothing more nothing less.

I think its safe to say based on your responses that the myth that whey protein concentrate is junk has been well and truly shattered :lol:

Anyway

Here is what a B.P rep wrote on another forum with regard to some supposed lab results that were doing the rounds not too long ago

*" *Hi,

The testing cited above is something that we're aware of and we've been liaising with those that undertook the testing. When I was initially linked to the original thread (Dutch forum), I was surprised to say the least. I have a file with literally hundreds of test results, and we've never ever had a test come up that low (well, once, but it was re-tested as there was a testing error). The tests we undertake are from an independent lab (ILS, for those familiar).

I wanted to cross reference the testing results above with our own independent tests. Unfortunately, the guys were unable to tell us the batch details or the flavour that was tested. They did kindly send through the test document; the test certificate was from a Bulgarian lab, but I've had it translated. There was no reference to Bulk Powders or Pure Whey Protein so I'm still in the dark. I'm very concerned that there seems to be no traceability whatsoever.

As well as our independent testing, we've had our products tested by various other parties, such as Trading Standards, without issue. The same Dutch forum also tested our whey a few weeks back, with no issues. Members of this forum have tested our products on several occasions; again, without issue.

I do find it strange that us, MP, Reflex and Optimum would all test up low - all are brands that have been tested previously with no/few problems but all of a sudden the test results are low (and massively low at that).

We're continuing to converse with the people that sent the products for testing, to get as much information as we can.

In the meantime, if anyone has any questions, feel free to drop me a line: [email protected]

Simon Jurkiw
Product Director*"*

IIRC some guys on here sent some concentrate off for testing a few years ago after these internet rumours surfaced and they came back good to go.

I think they actually showed a slightly higher percentage than what was advertised, the company rep explained they always err on the side of caution so as to not fall foul of trading standards.Companies like M.P, B.P etc would be literally mad to save a few quid by under dosing their protein at the risk of losing all reputability and customer confidence, especially considering how easy it is for someone to get the product tested for themselves.


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

12 gauge said:


> Im under no illusions as to what whey is and what it can do for me as part of my nutritional/dietary intake, its a convenient economical source of protein, nothing more nothing less.
> 
> I think its safe to say based on your responses that the myth that whey protein concentrate is junk has been well and truly shattered :lol:
> 
> ...


 Your not a rep are you...let me answer that for you YES YOU ARE! Wouldn't want anyone actually knowing the truth.


----------



## 12 gauge (Jul 16, 2011)

Acidreflux said:


> The process grantees the quality...circles round and round.ffs


 The same process that showed (in the results you yourself posted) that a concentrate contained more protein than an isolate?

O.K mate I believe ya.


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

12 gauge said:


> The same process that showed (in the results you yourself posted) that a concentrate contained more protein than an isolate?
> 
> O.K mate I believe ya.


 https://labdoor.com/rankings/protein....I suppose quality has nothing to do with nutritional values.


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

http://www.supplementlabtest.com/


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

https://www.consumerlab.com/m/news/Protein_Powders_Reviewed/6_11_2013/


----------



## 12 gauge (Jul 16, 2011)

"By using the nitrogen analysis a protein content of 76,4% has been measured. This represents a deviation of 1,2% compared to the specified percentage of 77,3% on the label for the taste vanilla. On the basis of the amino acid analysis we can rule out aminospiking seen there are no abnormal values in relation to the total protein content. The measured carbohydrate and sugar content of 6,76 grams is lower with the 10 grams indicated on the label. So a very good result for Pure Whey from Bulkpowders"

Good result I can live with that,


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexmorrell/2015/03/12/lawsuits-say-protein-powders-lack-protein-ripping-off-athletes/#740cdf331039

All bollocks I suppose even the mighty Arnolds selling s**t and sued in an american court of law...


----------



## 12 gauge (Jul 16, 2011)

Acidreflux said:


> http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexmorrell/2015/03/12/lawsuits-say-protein-powders-lack-protein-ripping-off-athletes/#740cdf331039
> 
> All bollocks I suppose even the mighty Arnolds selling s**t and sued in an american court of law...


 That's referring to the process of amino spiking, I raised that issue on here a while ago, it was cleared up, the lab result for B.P concentrate according to one of the links you've posted above has ruled it out and has returned a result which is 1.2% less than stated according to that source, so B.P concentrate according to them contains over 76% protein, I wouldn't call that junk.


----------



## 12 gauge (Jul 16, 2011)

response from B.P

https://www.uk-muscle.co.uk/topic/185729-quality-of-bulk-whey-protein/?do=embed&embedComment=3395707&embedDo=findComment


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

12 gauge said:


> Wouldn't touch it with a barge poll....I keep expecting a man on a horse and cart to roll up telling me to buy his potion that cures everything.....


----------



## 12 gauge (Jul 16, 2011)

Acidreflux said:


> any other form has had all benefits from supplementing whey protein destroyed...


 In a word bollox,

76% protein with no amino spiking for a concentrate which has a higher bio availability due to less processing is pretty much what is expected and advertised, End of, I'm off to bed, shame you couldn't provide anything of substance to back your claim.


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

12 gauge said:


> In a word bollox,
> 
> 76% protein with no amino spiking for a concentrate which has a higher bio availability due to less processing is pretty much what is expected and advertised, End of, I'm off to bed, shame you couldn't provide anything of substance to back your claim.


 I did but your blinkered im afraid...


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

lol at two guys arguing about the best fart powder.


----------



## trey1 (Aug 10, 2015)

Dark sim said:


> Still doesn't help. My idea of good size, shape, will be different to the next.


 sorry, here is an example. Ur idea of very good will be different eg competing physique etc

View attachment 120425-F-WM587-159.JPG


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

trey1 said:


> sorry, here is an example. Ur idea of very good will be different eg competing physique etc
> 
> View attachment 121027


 Not possible natty


----------



## trey1 (Aug 10, 2015)

Jatin Bhatia said:


> Not possible natty


 thanks. will do as good as i can natural and if im ready to use test one day i will research etc and maybe do it


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

trey1 said:


> thanks. will do as good as i can natural and if im ready to use test one day i will research etc and maybe do it


 :thumbup1:


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Jatin Bhatia said:


> Not possible natty


 Why?


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

Natty Steve'o said:


> Why?


 Assuming an average height of 178 cm, that lad doesn't look near 170lbs with that conditioning.


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Jatin Bhatia said:


> Assuming an average height of *178 cm, that lad doesn't look near 170lbs* with that conditioning.


 Now what's that in english money.... 5ft 8....12st 1lb.... yeah I would say it's doable. He's probably shorter though.


----------



## trey1 (Aug 10, 2015)

Jatin Bhatia said:


> Assuming an average height of 178 cm, that lad doesn't look near 170lbs with that conditioning.


 i'n 183cm / 74.3kg


----------



## Goranchero (Mar 26, 2015)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrication_in_the_United_Kingdom


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

Natty Steve'o said:


> Now what's that in english money.... 5ft 8....*12st 1lb*.... yeah I would say it's doable. He's probably shorter though.


 You think the guy in the picture is 12st or 168lbs?


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

trey1 said:


> i'n 183cm / 74.3kg


 I was referring to the guy in the picture mate


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Jatin Bhatia said:


> You think the guy in the picture is 12st or 168lbs?


 Quite frankly my dear, I don't give a damn  same same...


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

Natty Steve'o said:


> Quite frankly my dear, I don't give a damn  same same...


 My ****ed up writing skill has led the discussion down i guess..lol

I was saying, the guy in the picture looks to me beyond 170 lbs easily. Assuming his height is around 178 cms, that level of conditioning will be almost impossible to achieve at the weight above 170lbs naturally . Phewwww


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Jatin Bhatia said:


> My ****ed up writing skill has led the discussion down i guess..lol
> 
> I was saying, the guy in the picture looks to me beyond 170 lbs easily. Assuming his height is around 178 cms, that level of conditioning will be almost impossible to achieve at the weight above 170lbs naturally . Phewwww


 Ok and I suggested he would be shorter....


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/04/protein-drinks/index.htm

Not needed.


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

Natty Steve'o said:


> Ok and I suggested he would be shorter....


 The shorter he is, more possible it is


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

http://www.returnofkings.com/30651/why-supplements-are-a-waste-of-money

Not needed.


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

http://www.coachcalorie.com/stop-using-protein-powder/


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

Jatin Bhatia said:


> The shorter he is, more possible it is


 I actually knew a couple of guys like this way back in the day. They would be in the 5tf 5 or 5ft 6 range. they were of half english half african/jamaican decent. They were just naturally ripped and muscular even before they looked at a set of weights. Its very possible naturally. You need to have the right genetic make up though. Some people are just like this...


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

Wasn't this brand found to have multiple heavy metals. :thumb:


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

Natty Steve'o said:


> I actually knew a couple of guys like this way back in the day. They would be in the 5tf 5 or 5ft 6 range. they were of half english half african/jamaican decent. They were just naturally ripped and muscular even before they looked at a set of weights. Its very possible naturally. You need to have the right genetic make up though. Some people are just like this...


 Agree. However, Either you need to see to believe in something like this or have experienced with yourself. Unfortunately, personally i have never seen a guy with decent size and a good amount of conditioning nor i myself have reached that stage where i can claim to someone that this kind of physique can be obtained natty. So, every time someone show me a kind of picture like above, a straight no comes into my mind.


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

Acidreflux said:


> http://www.returnofkings.com/30651/why-supplements-are-a-waste-of-money
> 
> Not needed.





Acidreflux said:


> http://www.coachcalorie.com/stop-using-protein-powder/


 Did you see who the articles were written by? No credentials at all.

Read, post something by someone of importance in the industry, then the information may carry some weight.

Not saying I disagree with supplements aren't needed, there are only 2 that I use, creatine and whey. Science has proved they work for long enough that there is no point discussing them.

The 'whey not needed' argument-

They contain some artificial sweeteners, so what, they have been proven to be safe.

It spikes insulin....since when has that been a problem? Just a misunderstanding of insulin. Whey is usually consumed with carbs anyway.

It lacks nutrients yes, but only a problem if your whole diet consists of whey.

No, you don't need it go reach your goals, but it is convenient and the highest bio available protein source there is.

Whey is the cheapest form of protein there is.


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

trey1 said:


> sorry, here is an example. Ur idea of very good will be different eg competing physique etc
> 
> View attachment 121027


 If you have decent genetics, then yes it is possible without aas.


----------



## MickeyE (Sep 17, 2015)

Acidreflux said:


> Ok read this...then ask questions but remember we buy protein by weight!
> 
> *
> Cold Filtered, Micro Filtered, Ultra Filtered, Ion Exchange - Whey Protein Processing Methods Explained
> ...


 I am no scientist but that article looks like complete junk.

On one hand it says that ion exchange changes the protein structure so that it's *"biological activity is reduced or completely eliminated."*

biological activity being the beneficial or adverse effect it has on the body. So for BBing the biggest benefit we are looking for from protein is it's muscle building properties. So what that statement says is that those properties are either reduced or non existent.

Then it goes on to say

*"The Ion Exchange process does not change the number of grams of protein in the product. From a physique or athletic standpoint you will not notice a difference in a protein that is denatured from one that has its biological factors intact."*

So if you believe the consensus of the role that protein plays in muscle building, how if a portion of your daily protein intake has reduced or "completely eliminated" biological activity will you not notice a difference from a physique standpoint?


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

Dark sim said:


> Did you see who the articles were written by? No credentials at all.
> 
> Read, post something by someone of importance in the industry, then the information may carry some weight.
> 
> ...


 If they whey is of the quality as stated...but yet to see any proof.

It all stems from how the cows are fed all the whey through to the final product, I'll stick with grass fed organic meat.


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

MickeyE said:


> I am no scientist but that article looks like complete junk.
> 
> On one hand it says that ion exchange changes the protein structure so that it's *"biological activity is reduced or completely eliminated."*
> 
> ...


 Just like whey protein complete junk...


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

This website has turned into the LBC radio of body buliding forums :thumbup1:


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

Acidreflux said:


> If they whey is of the quality as stated...but yet to see any proof.
> 
> It all stems from how the cows are fed all the whey through to the final product, I'll stick with grass fed organic meat.


 Do you think muscles care your beef is grass fed?


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)




----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

Dark sim said:


> Do you think muscles care your beef is grass fed?


 I'm not interested in playing internet text tennis...but I've found a Whey protein I would actually use.

https://www.organicdaisy.co.uk/checkout/cart/ can't knock it! See most cows aren't left to feed how they were supposed to over decades of evolution...so instead they are fed s**t litterally and we all know what happens there (mad cows disease)

Cows do not need acid in there stomachs to digest grass which is what they should eat....when fed cheap hay, corn, soya etc they develop I'll health because they cant digest it, so around every 4 months antibiotics are administered to clear up kidney infections etc This all ends up impacting the quality of the milk/meat produced...so yeah I like to know what I'm eating.


----------

