In all fairness, what is considered Natural and not natural? We all use supps, fat burners, PWO's, DHEA/Andro etc etc with most of the ingredients being not "natural"....
Not being coy here....
This is a question that many don't want to discuss, but a good discussion topic nonetheless.
If I were to classify "not natural", it's whatever supplement/drug/chemical can be used as an excuse by "naturals" as to why I look they way I do and they don't.
Thing is, the really big and lean guys look like that because they employ
ALL avenues of help to get there - supplements, food, obsessive training and meal prep AND some gear of choice. Mix these ingredients with dedication and you've got amazing, super-human results.
I personally think the reason natty's chalk things up to "he's just on gear" is because they don't do the things a gearhead does to get that big/lean because they already believe they won't see those kind of results even if they did try their best. It's ironic. The gear just ends up being a barrier
to the person who isn't using it.
And when you step outside of the fallible moral code that our government & society has attempted to engineer, you'll see that being obsessive with supplementation, diet and training but without the heavy hitters like Testosterone or peptides is much like building a race car from the ground up with all the best suspension, body and transmission parts only to ignore the potential benefit of a built motor and instead you stick with a 100% stock Miata motor as your power plant. Weird analogy, but it's what came to mind.
I think the fellas definition of "natty" being something that does not require PCT is not a bad definition, but still has holes in it.
I think of Clen/T3. Certainly not natty at all. I can run those for 6 weeks and get more out of them than I could with 60mg of Anavar every day. Yet, they don't require PCT either.
And to doubles' point - let's compare supplemental Creatine to Testosterone.
1) Both found naturally in the body
2) Both increase nutrient partitioning to muscles
3) Both increase athletic performance
4) Both lead to lean weight gain
5) Both can be taken exogenously
6) Both are often supplemented at various doses far beyond what a normal diet/lifestyle could offer
7) Both are cheap
8) Both are safe (taken responsibly)
One is regulated
That same one is considered "cheating" unless an older man (
who wishes to defy his natural physical decline) wants to feel better
Like I said, the government & media created this "athletic morality" that people now blindly follow. Making AAS controlled has done nothing but create a nationwide excuse for aspiring athletes to not do whatever it takes to attain the performance or physique desired.
Now don't misunderstand me - I am not saying that "whatever it takes" means that you are willing to harm others directly or indirectly to get to the goal - that isn't moral. Everyone should have a line drawn in the sand where their limit is, but it wouldn't hurt for more people in our society to take calculated risks to achieve great things, and this I'm not just referring to body sculpting but ANYTHING in life. Don't let someone else's "line in the sand" hold you back from trying something yourself.
***EDIT***
Insulin doesn't require a PCT, is 100% OTC (Humulin-R), is cheap, is the most anabolic hormone the body produces (by a long shot) and separates the aspiring amateur bodybuilders from the pros in most cases and it also has the longest lasting set of consequences and can be the most dangerous when overdosed and used improperly.
Something to think about.
