# Best non-hormonal anabolic?



## Shaneyboy (May 21, 2013)

Is there any thing that actually works (excluding creatine which does increase my strength/reps)

i was planning to use 11-KT but concerned about possible prostate implications of hormonal agents.

i am not convinced about SARMs but looking for something natural.


----------



## Lifesizepenguin (Jul 25, 2016)

In short, no - other than creatine, although that isnt an "anabolic" in the way you are thinking or looking for. otherwise BBers would be using that and not steroids.

Lets put it this way though, 11-KT is extremely mild in terms of steroids, and plenty of bodybuilders stack large amounts of much harsher AAS, yet their prostates are relatively ok.

What makes you think that your prostate is so special that its just gonna blow up and need immediate looking at after a 4 week cycle of a mild, transdermal steroid?

Stick to creatine if you are worried. or just hop on if you are not - those are your options. everything else is an expensive lie/gimmick.


----------



## Shaneyboy (May 21, 2013)

Thanks for reality check. I had become concerned about 11-KT due to a couple of recent studies and rumours about why OL had pulled the product.

shame that there is not a non-hormonal agent that promotes protein synthesis


----------



## Lifesizepenguin (Jul 25, 2016)

Shaneyboy said:


> Thanks for reality check. I had become concerned about 11-KT due to a couple of recent studies and rumours about why OL had pulled the product.
> 
> shame that there is not a non-hormonal agent that promotes protein synthesis


 well, theres protein 

but i think what you want is not gonna be possible.

can you tell me how recent? I have ran both xi-kt and 11kt in the past and really liked both especially for the cortisol controlling properties. I've had my prostate checked via bloods and they are fine too.

Can you link me to any of these studies, im very interested in reading them.

as a side note, xi-kt is still available, and its iron legion not OL anymore. see below.

http://www.predatornutrition.com/prohormones/iron-legion-supplements/xi-kt.html

Also OL discontinued, but they still sell 11 Keto as their own new product now SUP3R-11

http://www.predatornutrition.com/prohormones/olympus-labs/sup3r-11.html


----------



## Shaneyboy (May 21, 2013)

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0159867

http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/41760156/-hydroxydihydrotestosterone_and_11-ketod20160129-5673-1d7eb3x.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires=1489587643&Signature=UloSLx%2BZFZT2ByJc8LUYxNtFNJk%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B filename%3D11-Hydroxydihydrotestosterone_and_11-ke.pdf

i was under the impression that OL Sup3r-11 has been discontinued?


----------



## ausmaz (Jul 14, 2014)

Tbh mate if your looking for that kind of effect you would be much better off doing low dose cycles of actual steroids....assuming you can get legitimate gear i would go with that over anything 'pro hormone' wise. ANYBODY can stick a label on a bottle and market it as 'the latest greatest' when actually the supplement industry is about as regulated as an ugl....


----------



## Lifesizepenguin (Jul 25, 2016)

Shaneyboy said:


> http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0159867
> 
> http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/41760156/-hydroxydihydrotestosterone_and_11-ketod20160129-5673-1d7eb3x.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires=1489587643&Signature=UloSLx%2BZFZT2ByJc8LUYxNtFNJk%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B filename%3D11-Hydroxydihydrotestosterone_and_11-ke.pdf
> 
> i was under the impression that OL Sup3r-11 has been discontinued?


 Im pretty sure thats the same study I have read before. It is concluding that the prostate risks are less than actual testosterone, but still notable as an endogeonous hormone.

11 Ketotestosterone is not only endogenous but it is a "sex hormone" meaning you maintain sexual functionality whilst using without test. Its not very supressive either.

If you are looking for sheer muscle mass growth - 11 KT is not for you. It is extremely mild, but its cortisol controlling properties are outstanding, meaning its great for a bit of fat loss. Its also an adrenal steroid so its quie good while on cutting cycles. Your strength will increase quite well and youll feel generally pretty good. No PCT needed for a normal dodse of xi-kt or 11-KT spray

but @ausmaz is right, youd prob be better with a low dose steroid, or if you dont wanna get involved in hormone altering substances, your best getting some creatine.

p.s. no it isnt:

http://www.predatornutrition.com/prohormones/olympus-labs/sup3r-11.html


----------



## Shaneyboy (May 21, 2013)

Thanks for help guys


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

As this is in the Natural Bodybuilding section, I'll just mention that weight training and food are the anabolic stimuli you should be relying on  .


----------



## Lifesizepenguin (Jul 25, 2016)

Ultrasonic said:


> As this is in the Natural Bodybuilding section, I'll just mention that weight training and food are the anabolic stimuli you should be relying on  .


 I did say creatine 

You are right though.


----------



## Bull Terrier (May 14, 2012)

Well actually there are several others which haven't been mentioned such as tomatidine (now being marketed by Antaeus Labs), Ursolic acid (the best one comes in spray form and is marketed by Prototype Nutrition) and several others which I'm less familiar with.

Have a look if you're interested at these references:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4804074/#B56

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4031541/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3120768/


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

Lifting heavy s**t.


----------



## musclebubble (Jul 2, 2011)

ausmaz said:


> Tbh mate if your looking for that kind of effect you would be much better off doing low dose cycles of actual steroids....assuming you can get legitimate gear i would go with that over anything 'pro hormone' wise. ANYBODY can stick a label on a bottle and market it as 'the latest greatest' when actually the supplement industry is about as regulated as an ugl....


 This is NATURAL BODYBUILDING forum. Shouldn't be recommending people on doing steroids tbh! That's why there are different forums. No offence!


----------



## musclebubble (Jul 2, 2011)

i expected the first reply to the question to be "FOOD"

That's the usual answer, and probably the correct answer.

To the OP! There are no quick schemes. (naturally). It takes few years. (although most gains will be in the first 2). Just eating & training will do the job. No quick fixes!


----------



## ausmaz (Jul 14, 2014)

musclebubble said:


> This is NATURAL BODYBUILDING forum. Shouldn't be recommending people on doing steroids tbh! That's why there are different forums. No offence!


 No offence taken man, i was just trying to point out that 'supplement wise' - with the exception of creatine.....everything else is pretty much useless...plus he did mention 11- kt, so from that i suggested he'd be better off with legitimate gear rather than a pro hormone...

I also was not recommending he take anything, just offering an opinion...your absolutely right though, this is the natural section so consider me chastised


----------



## Fadi (Dec 14, 2010)

Shaneyboy said:


> Is there any thing that actually works (excluding creatine which does increase my strength/reps)


 Yes there is: carbohydrates.



Shaneyboy said:


> ...looking for something natural.


 Carbohydrates are natural.

For all the members who do not approve of a high carbohydrate eating protocol, and have gone on the latest low carb high fat eating lifestyle (or have even embraced fasting and the ketogenic way of eating)..., for the record, my daily energy (caloric consumption) is derived from/between 75% to 80% fat, with the remaining percentages coming from protein and carbohydrates. So if that's the case, why am I suggesting this macronutrient (carbohydrate) as a huge and powerful player for what you need to get ahead of the game as a bodybuilder/strength/power athlete? Simply (and honestly put), because carbohydrates are a performance enhancing substance, a trait they share with steroids.

Am I saying or suggesting that your body has to have carbohydrates in order for you to be able to carry out some anaerobic activity? The answer is no. You can still generate sufficient substrate to produce glycogen from both protein and fat consumption, even though it's a less efficient way of extracting energy, the quick anaerobic energy that your sport requires: glycogen.

I'll leave it here for now, and just say that you need to know that not all your carbohydrate foods are created equal either, hence different carbs would yield different results within your body, if you are in tune with its messages, and are paying close attention to the way different carbs affect your performance differently, through glycogen replenishment.

Fadi.


----------



## W. W. (Feb 10, 2018)

The best non-hormonal anabolic is proper nutrition


----------



## AestheticManlet (Jun 12, 2012)

Food


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

High carb diet with optimal fat and protein


----------



## Fadi (Dec 14, 2010)

Shaneyboy said:


> *Best non-hormonal anabolic?*


 Out of the three macronutrients we consume, carbohydrates are unique. What makes them unique? Well, our body can make use of them under *anaerobic conditions*. What does that mean exactly? It means that when you're applying some serious effort lifting the weights, if you were to go deep inside of your muscle cell, you'll find one element missing from the equation, and that element is oxygen. So what we're talking about here is you, smashing it during a period of cellular oxygen deprivation (ouch, that muscle burns already, can you feel it!).

Moving on ...

Without the consumption of carbs, would your muscles and mine, your liver and mine..., would they contain as much glycogen as if we were ingesting some carbs or not? I say almost certainly not. Your muscles and mine, would they be as efficient in utilising glycogen in the *absence of regular *carb intake? Well, you tell me..., but I tell you, based on my own experience, the simple and quick answer is a big fat No!

So in conclusion, dropping carbs from your eating plan, can be detrimental to some aspects of your performance in the gym. Before I get ahead of myself here, what do I really mean when I say "performance enhancing"? I mean to have the ability to recover quicker, which basically facilitates further, my ability to train harder, and if I can train harder ..., you get the picture gentlemen. It's a circle of one positive leading into yet another positive, and on we go...

In plain English, carbohydrates are a performance enhancing substance (as far as lifting of weights is concerned).

End of story ...

Cheers.


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

Proper nutrition is the 'anabolic key'. For this you need to provide adequate protein to support a pro-anabolic protein balance, and enough energy to sustain best possible performance and promote proper recovery. Proper hydration and intake of micronutrients also important.

I tend to agree with @Fadi that while carbs are not technically directly anabolic to muscle tissue, they indirectly do have a benefit in that they help sustain the kind of exercise that creates the best possible stimulus to grow - anaerobic exercise like intense resistance training. If you train at lower intensities, or only train high intensity for short bursts, you may not see much performance benefit from carbs and be happy as a low carber, but higher intensity activity for longer periods is definitely best sustained with a higher carb intake.


----------



## Fadi (Dec 14, 2010)

dtlv said:


> Proper nutrition is the 'anabolic key'. For this you need to provide adequate protein to support a pro-anabolic protein balance, and enough energy to sustain best possible performance and promote proper recovery. Proper hydration and intake of micronutrients also important.


 Only a fool would disagree with the very balanced approach we see above. Thank you Sir.



dtlv said:


> I tend to agree with @Fadi that while carbs are not technically directly anabolic to muscle tissue, they indirectly do have a benefit in that they help sustain the kind of exercise that creates the best possible stimulus to grow - anaerobic exercise like intense resistance training. If you train at lower intensities, or only train high intensity for short bursts, you may not see much performance benefit from carbs and be happy as a low carber, but higher intensity activity for longer periods is definitely best sustained with a higher carb intake.


 I fully agree with the above also.

For the record, I no longer subscribe to the keto/very high fat/low carb diet, however I did give it a good go and it really does energise the brain..., even too much if you ask me, as we need that balance between high energy and the quieting of the mind. I'm back to eating a high carb diet now, and my insulin and blood sugar levels are getting well looked after with my current weight lifting routine, and general physical activity. When it comes to carbs; insulin, and blood sugar levels, I find that legumes (for me), play a large part in maintaining some healthy parameters coming from that department. Syndrome X is not the club I'd wish to belong to, not now ... not ever!


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

Fadi said:


> Only a fool would disagree with the very balanced approach we see above. Thank you Sir.
> 
> I fully agree with the above also.
> 
> For the record, I no longer subscribe to the keto/very high fat/low carb diet, however I did give it a good go and it really does energise the brain..., even too much if you ask me, as we need that balance between high energy and the quieting of the mind. I'm back to eating a high carb diet now, and my insulin and blood sugar levels are getting well looked after with my current weight lifting routine, and general physical activity. When it comes to carbs; insulin, and blood sugar levels, I find that legumes (for me), play a large part in maintaining some healthy parameters coming from that department. Syndrome X is not the club I'd wish to belong to, not now ... not ever!





dtlv said:


> Proper nutrition is the 'anabolic key'. For this you need to provide adequate protein to support a pro-anabolic protein balance, and enough energy to sustain best possible performance and promote proper recovery. Proper hydration and intake of micronutrients also important.
> 
> I tend to agree with @Fadi that while carbs are not technically directly anabolic to muscle tissue, they indirectly do have a benefit in that they help sustain the kind of exercise that creates the best possible stimulus to grow - anaerobic exercise like intense resistance training. If you train at lower intensities, or only train high intensity for short bursts, you may not see much performance benefit from carbs and be happy as a low carber, but higher intensity activity for longer periods is definitely best sustained with a higher carb intake.


 One question,suppose Type 2 diabetes runs in some one family. Though, he or she loves simple carbs. Do you think adding something like psyllium husk before bingeing on simple carbs would would help with insulin issues?


----------



## Fadi (Dec 14, 2010)

Jordan08 said:


> One question,suppose Type 2 diabetes runs in some one family. Though, he or she loves simple carbs. Do you think adding something like psyllium husk before bingeing on simple carbs would would help with insulin issues?


 I think you meant to say Type 1 diabetes, where insulin is required. Type 2 is basically having insulin resistance, where although your body does produce insulin, your cells don't recognise it well enough to welcome it with open arms/receptors.

As for your question re taking in a large amount of pure fiber then going on a binge of simple carbs. I don't think a band aid defense mechanism such as a large intake of fiber would stand a chance against the binge. Why is that? Because it's not simply about the intake of simple carbs, but the load of the glycemic index that matters much more than simply the glycemic index itself. For example, carrots are high on the glycemic index, but the load in carbs of a carrot is very low so as to not be detrimental. Now go and juice 1kg of carrots, and drink their yield, which comes to 50% by weight, or 500ml of carrot juice minus the fiber. Your bloodstream here would view the load of carbs as being a whopping 70g of sugar ingested in an instant. Perhaps that would be great post workout when your cells are very much in an insulin sensitive state at that time.

I believe that the word "*overall*" is very important when it comes to eating. It's not about this or that little thing that you're doing here or there, but rather, give me/tell me about the way you're eating overall, and I'd tell you where you stand. A piece of cake that is full of sugar, fat, and processed carbs, is not going to kill you, and your body (most probably) has the capabilities to handle its shortcomings. But that's a piece of cake in an ocean of some amazingly high nutritious food overall..., and *never* the other way around, hence I do not subscribe to the taking of supplements when one's overall eating/lifestyle has a lot to be desired.

A band aid is just that..., a band aid!


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

Jordan08 said:


> One question,suppose Type 2 diabetes runs in some one family. Though, he or she loves simple carbs. Do you think adding something like psyllium husk before bingeing on simple carbs would would help with insulin issues?


 Long post here and an anecdote (I don't normally do anecdotes but I will here as I think it'll help illustrate something relevant) that relates to T2D. My wife was adopted, and T2D is rampant in her adoptive mother's family. Her mum is one of six kids, five women and one guy, and her four sisters all have T2D while she and her brother have pre diabetes. Her father died of T2D complications about six years ago, and her mother still lives but also has T2D. Collectively they all suffer various T2D related issues - peripheral neuropathy, cataracts, hypoglycemic episodes etc. Roughly a third of all their collective kids also have issues.

Now for me observing this family has been fascinating to me from a nutritional perspective because it gives a real insight into hereditary type 2 diabetes, something which is obviously prevalent here. In the years that I've known this family I've seen all of those with T2D try all kinds of diets, and sometimes even take some advice from me (but try giving nutritional advice to a family member at your own peril - it's certainly much easier with a client, lol), but the one thing that's totally clear is that the main way to reduce symptoms of T2D is to maintain a healthy body composition and not be overweight. This trumps any dietary tricks, including high fiber diets or added fiber taken with high sugar foods. The two who have the least issues and managed to maintain the best markers (fasting glucose and A1C levels) are the two who have made most effort to be as lean as possible. One has achieved this through a fairly average American diet that isn't particularly clean but is calorie controlled overall, and the other through a 'clean eating' approach, also calorie controlled, with an obsession over lots of things - many of which I don't believe matter (detoxes, alkaline foods, immune 'boosting' herbs etc) but that's another story. They are also both the two who are the most physically active, by far. The others who have the continued issues and full blown T2D collectively have followed a range of approaches including low sugar/low carb, vegetarianism and veganism, high fiber diets... but none of them have managed to, other than for a short period at a time, control the overall amount of food that they eat on these approaches. They also all do almost no exercise.

Anyway, a few points about why that's all important. While there have now been close to 300 genes identified that have polymorphisms (SNP's - Single nucleotide polymorphisms) that contribute to insulin resistance and insensitivity, and the more you have that promote resistance or insensitivity the more likely you are to develop T2D, there is one subset of genes in particular that are associated with genetic T2D most strongly and appear to be the most important players in developing it, and what these genes do (in simple terms) is cause a much higher than normal percentage of energy from overeating (overeating calories from any source) to be preferentially stored not in subcutaneous fat stores as in a normal healthy person but in visceral fat stores, especially in the liver and pancreas. And it's this excess visceral fat storage that interferes with insulin signaling and glucose management brining about T2D. People who experience this genetic curse can therefore even develop T2D when at an otherwise healthy body weight and body composition, because it doesn't take much of an excess of visceral fat to cause problems, especially in combo with other gene polymorphisms that affect insulin signaling (and these SNP's tend to come in clusters). However there is of course also a secondary non-genetic pathway to T2D, and that's simply becoming excessively fat and having a poor body comp from continued overeating. This also promotes excess visceral fat storage through a different route (basically it simply overloads all the body's fat stores) and also promotes insulin resistance at a cellular level simply through a chronic exposure to a positive energy flux.

So the main single physiological issue behind T2D is excess visceral fat, however it got there, and not diet or sugar.

A mistake often made when thinking about T2D is that it's caused by eating carbs or, more specifically, by eating sugar. This mistake is easy to make because when T2 diabetics eat sugar or high glycemic foods they get more symptoms, so it seems logical. The other error made is that it's caused by the high insulin levels those foods promote. It's not either though. Diabetes (both T2 and T1) is a disease of impaired insulin control and glucose management where it's symptoms are most affected by higher sugar intakes and foods that promote higher plasma glucose fluctuations. It's not caused by the those things though.

For a crude analogy, saying that carbs or sugar cause T2D is as faulty logic as saying that when you take a bucket with multiple holes in it's bottom and up it's sides and try to fill it with water that the leak is caused by the water, but not caused by the holes. If you don't pour water in then none will leak, and the more water you suddenly pour in the more it leaks, but even if you pour no water in the holes are of course always still there.

In cases of non-genetic obesity driven T2D you can fix the holes simply by losing weight and returning to and maintaining a healthy body comp. In cases of genetic driven/hereditary T2D the materials the bucket is made of are fairly leaky and much harder to patch, and your best efforts to patch might well not ever completely stop the leaking.

I kind of went on a tangent there but it was for a reason. Going back to your question of whether co-ingesting some dietary fiber with a sugary meal or food would help, well it might slightly influence the post prandial blood sugar response to that feed and create a little less of a blood sugar spike followed by slightly less insulin overcompensation and a hypo crash, but what it won't do (for all the reasons above) is do anything at all to fix or prevent worsening of the T2D overall.

If a hereditary T2 diabetic likes sugary treats now and again, that's actually ok. But to limit their symptoms as best as possible they should firstly aim to be active and achieve as healthy a body composition as possible (through whatever macros helps them achieve that the best), and then maintain it. They then should also try to keep that diet as friendly as possible to stabilize blood glucose levels in general - decent protein and decent fiber intake generally, plus decent intake of plant foods that contain insulin stabilizing phytonutrients. With that in place as a general dietary practice, no need to do any specific dietary fiber gymnastics when eating a slice of cake or a candy bar.


----------



## Jack of blades (Apr 2, 2017)

Fadi said:


> Yes there is: carbohydrates.
> 
> Carbohydrates are natural.
> 
> ...


 would you say you get better results in size and strength if say your diet consists a lot of carbohydrates and say your diet is between say 60 and 70% carbohydrates?


----------



## Fadi (Dec 14, 2010)

Jack of blades said:


> would you say you get better results in size and strength if say your diet consists a lot of carbohydrates and say your diet is between say 60 and 70% carbohydrates?


 Yes.


----------

