natural bodybuilding

ORIGINAL: ShaqAtack


You show very little respect for scientists. Did you ever think why many of studies have to involve a low number of participants?  That's because they have to control their lives;  their eating habits, when they exercise, which exercise they do, they all have to be the same.  In many cases, those who submitted themselves to the study are under constant supervision which throws your human nature argument out the window. Some of the United States best scientists have done these things. Unbiasedness is their forte.

While their "child's play" as you called it to critique at least the scientists are trying to do something constructive. How do you suggest scientists match subjects up by genetic material?  Seeing as everyone's genetics are COMPLETELY different than every other.  Even those in the same immediate family can respond differently to exercise due to gene differences in muscle fiber count (and type) and hormone levels. Is what you are suggesting to include people of the same body type?  Everyone has different percentages of ectomorphism or mesomorphism anyhow.  In the end, human beings are different, but they're very much the same as well.  And when you get remarkable results from one concoction with many different people (with differing genetics) compared to placebo, which the volunteers also possibly assumed was the experimental potion, you had a result with that study!

And you're talking to a scientist, so I'm very aware how much money it costs to fund a study. 

Well, first, I didn't mean any disrespect to scientists.  Second, I AM a scientist, a biologist, Ph.D., from a decent school, decent postdoc, own grants, etc.  Third, I've participated myself in those kinds of studies.  It wasn't meant to be a slam.  Just a temper of reality to the often made claim, "it's a published scientific study, so therefore it must be true."  We know that it's only true within certain limited variables of the studies.


For any lack of respect, I apologize.  I didn't mean to discount the value of people's work.

"If there's nothing else that's relevant, I'll be leaving now"

"Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground"

Congratulations on your PhD. in Cell and Developmental Biology. And it was accomplished from Harvard University no less. You more than anyone should now how people are very different genetically and how it would be hard to group similar people based on that criteria into any particular study.  I am a PhD. candidate in Bio-Chemistry and had minored in Muscle Physiology. Suffice it to say both of us know a little about the body.
 
To address your response now.  I understand now that you did not mean any disrespect (since I didn't know you're in the profession).
 
Keep in mind however it's much easier to "pick apart" than to "build up", but building up takes more guts. Anyone with an all-encompassing view of reality (looks to the big picture, utilizing logic only) can find errors or inconsistency in short-term, short-goal, scientific studies. It's not the scientist's "job" to prove X will be the case for every person on earth no matter what other variables are present in their lives. In the end, each person has to take responsibility for their own selves and experiement themselves through trial and error to find the best results for them.  I think we'll agree the best place to start are from "helpful" scientific literature and not muscle ads.
 
One last thing.  When someone makes a claim, who are you more likely to believe?  One with no support, who yet speak authoritatively on the subject?  Or, one who cites many different scientific studies to back up his/her claims? So while a study may NOT be all-encompassingly true, use of studies with results that coincide with your claims gives experimental merit to argument.

wow, i never though i would see the day that two scientist go at each other damn near. to set the record straight, i would not even come close to saying that i am a scientific type person. though i have a great deal of respect for scientist, because its one of the hardest fields to me.
 
anyways, i just like to study up on as much as i can on why my body is the way it is. i looked up and found why my body builds muscle so easily and why i loose fat so poorly. it deffinatly is true though that everyone is different, yet alike in many ways. but i researched my body, and researched a lot of herbal and natural supplements that would fit me the best. it was actually fun to do that because it was like a game. to me anyways.

Proper grammar?? you dont capitalize at all...and since when do people start sentences with "and"?

ORIGINAL: chisum1357

wow, i never though i would see the day that two scientist go at each other damn near. to set the record straight, i would not even come close to saying that i am a scientific type person. though i have a great deal of respect for scientist, because its one of the hardest fields to me.

Nah, it's nothing mean-spirited, even if my first post came off that way, which was probably a poor choice in wording.  Scientists argue all the time.  It's a source for great ideas, and keeping everything as honest as possible.  Scientists are human, and even try as we might, it's not always possible to push out our subconcious leanings, and we depend on our colleagues to help us with that.

When I was in grad school, my favorite courses were those taught in a "tutorial" style, which is how all of the med school classes were taught.  The idea was that a problem (a "case") would be put before a small group of students led by a faculty member, and then we had to, as a team, derive first principles, ask the right questions, and if we did, we'd get the next part of the problem.  We learned a lot about how to "discuss" (read: argue) about all kinds of things.  There was no hesitation about engaging in battle.  It was how we got things done.  It was a hell of a lot of fun.  Nothing more fun for geeks then to talk geeks stuff among themselves.  Of course, we learned to present to our colleagues, too.  There were a lot of skills learned in those groups, not just book learning.

It's when it gets personal that it fails.

"If there's nothing else that's relevant, I'll be leaving now"

"Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground"

ORIGINAL: chisum1357

well that page that marc put up, what does natural really mean, seemed to answer all my questions. and it pretty much said everything that i have decided to go by anyways.

and if you are strong enough in mind, you wouldnt need supplements to gain or loose when you werent able to naturally. again i am not dissing supplements, for some people it just makes it easier and fits their lifestyle more than it would without.

for me personally, i just felt that supplements were becoming more of a crutch than an aid. so i was finding myself irritated when i didnt see results and would just go try something else. and when something did work for me, i would never go with out it. and like the no-xplode, i have to take it and wait until it "kicks in" so that it will work properly. i dont like having to wait, or having to take this because i am taking this and i would get better results stacking products.

that is the reason why i decided to go natural. if i have to take something at a certain time, or a certain way, then what is the point? and there is basically no way to get passed the whole processed part of anything. unless you kill it and grow it yourself, it is going to be processed. so i understand that part now. but i still believe that if a product is enhanced, or enhances normal effects then it is not natural. so to me, in my own damn personal opinion, taking creatine, not natural. eating foods that contain it, natural.

 
Eating specific natural foods at specific times around training and wake/sleep paterns can enhance normal effects. Nutrient timing is one of the biggest keys to changing the human physique. Different foods have different break down and absorbtion rates (ie; Glycemic index).
 
Unflavoured protein powder can be pretty close to natural if it's just microfiltered and dried making a fast absorbing source of protein, faster than meat or eggs. All it is made from is milk.
 
By eating a good clean healthy diet you are in fact the enhancing normal effects of your food and your training.

5'10"
211lbs

Life's to short to be small

Train, eat lots, get big!

houw waz mie grama then guyz

5'10"
211lbs

Life's to short to be small

Train, eat lots, get big!

I don't know tatch, you'll have to tell us how your Grandmother is doing . . . 

"If there's nothing else that's relevant, I'll be leaving now"

"Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground"

Well, this definition doesn't fly.  So are steroids.  But when we say someone is a natural bodybuilder, we mean no juice, right?

 
how are u going to say steroids are made natural in ur body?

Are you making testosterone ebbearsfb1?  Testosterone is a "classic" steroid.  So is estrogen, and you're making some of that too.  Where did you think they came from originally?

"If there's nothing else that's relevant, I'll be leaving now"

"Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground"

who cares about everyone elses grammar as long as you can understand it then its no big deal. worry about your own before telling other people about their grammar problems

well thats the thing, some ppl say everything is natural. creatine in in the body already naturally, but in a small amount. some ppl even go out on a limb and say steroids are natural because its just hormones the body already has. you mkae up your own mind on what u wanna belive is natural and what isnt. i think everything but roids is for the most part natural. 

if lookin2getript, tatch and ebbearsfb1 would have actually read all the posts in this thread, you would have found that i had already explained what i meant by that towards ectomorph who answered my question. read first, then from there, you will be able to have an accurate observation point and you will sound like you know what you are saying when you say it. otherwise you come off like an idiot who just wants to start crap as opposed to being part of a consversation.

and yeah i do understand that a lot of these supplements can be considered natural to most people. the reason why i feel them to not be natural is because they are designed to enhance everything. and to be quite honest they were just getting too expensive for me. i mean before i was stacking no-xplode, thermogain, fish oil, ginseng, and vitamins. and yeah they all worked wonders for me, but since i have stopped using the supplements, no-xplode and thermogain, i have noticed myself to going back to "normal".
 
i have to work harder to keep the gains i had in lifting and cardio, and my size hasnt gone down yet, but i am sure it will. its just the fact that i find myself enjoying working out a lot more without the supplements. i feel better after my workout, yeah when i first get at lifting i find it hard to finish, but i force myself and when i am done i feel real good. and i am easily able to relax after lifting, as oppossed to waiting for the supplements to wear off.

and to the two scientists, i know that your body can reject something it finds to be "foreign", but i have only witnesed it when one of my tattoos got infected and my body rejected a lot of the ink, but how do you know if your body is rejecting something that you injest. like natural or non natural supplements. what kind of things happen at that point?