Are steroids a long term thing? Thoughts

Page 2 of 3 First 123 Last
  1. Advanced Member
    vassille's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    968
    Rep Power
    48009
    Level
    26
    Lv. Percent
    10.77%

    Quote Originally Posted by Captn_the View Post
    JFC.... Really??? This statement would have to be one of the worst horseshyte bro science statements I've seen posted for some time.
    Are you stupid bro or just ignorant or both?
    To be at a higher weight all the time and being on anabolics long-term requires a lot of food. All that food puts a lot of strain on you digestive system, including your pancreas and your organs in general. To eat 400-500-600g of carbs a day requires a ton of insulin. Dont you think this insulin has some kind of effect on cells?
    Maybe you should get off the juice sometimes and do a little more research instead of making statements that shows your level of knowledge and ignorance.

  2. Senior Member
    madds87's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  190 lbs.
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,904
    Rep Power
    98806
    Level
    39
    Lv. Percent
    54.66%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Captn_the View Post

    People get high off religion all the time. It's the brainwashing that does it. Opium of the Masses they call it for good reason
    Wow.... thats your opinion sir.... lets revert back and ignore that...
    Its your opinion... and im sorry you feel that way... but cigs and drugs are addicting... im not agreeing. With the religious part.
  3. SPS
    New Member
    SPS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    409
    Rep Power
    33607
    Level
    18
    Lv. Percent
    80.03%

    Quote Originally Posted by vassille View Post
    Are you stupid bro or just ignorant or both?
    To be at a higher weight all the time and being on anabolics long-term requires a lot of food. All that food puts a lot of strain on you digestive system, including your pancreas and your organs in general. To eat 400-500-600g of carbs a day requires a ton of insulin. Dont you think this insulin has some kind of effect on cells?
    Maybe you should get off the juice sometimes and do a little more research instead of making statements that shows your level of knowledge and ignorance.
    You are probably right but that is pretty doom and gloom considering the avg Joe is at a "higher" weight(fat) eats way too many carbs and doesn't work out and still manages to live to his 60s, 70s, 80s
    •   
       

  4. Stupes
    Guest
    Stupes's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by SPS View Post

    You are probably right but that is pretty doom and gloom considering the avg Joe is at a "higher" weight(fat) eats way too many carbs and doesn't work out and still manages to live to his 60s, 70s, 80s
    Yeah - people who typically develop type II diabetes are chronically overweight (fat) and have high sugar diets. A guy who eats good carbs and works out is not typically developing diabetes.
  5. Diamond Member
    jbryand101b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    14,792
    Rep Power
    2687353
    Level
    86
    Lv. Percent
    99.3%
    Achievements Activity ProActivity AuthorityActivity VeteranPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    Quote Originally Posted by Stupes View Post
    Yeah - people who typically develop type II diabetes are chronically overweight (fat) and have high sugar diets. A guy who eats good carbs and works out is not typically developing diabetes.
    what are good carbs?
  6. Elite Member
    Celorza's Avatar
    Stats
    5'6"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Age
    23
    Posts
    9,552
    Rep Power
    2428708
    Level
    76
    Lv. Percent
    42.62%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by jbryand101b View Post

    what are good carbs?
    Carbs that taste good of course? Silly Jb a obviously good carbs are cake, cookies, pasta, pizza, brownies and syrup...with pancakes!
    >SNS-Glycophase<
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Rep
  7. Stupes
    Guest
    Stupes's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by jbryand101b View Post
    what are good carbs?
    Carbs that are put to good use. Carbs that don't just sit there and make you fat.

    Example - fast acting carbs right before bed that aren't carrying nutrients to muscle/energy use - and they spike insulin and go to fat storage - those are bad.
  8. Elite Member
    Celorza's Avatar
    Stats
    5'6"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Age
    23
    Posts
    9,552
    Rep Power
    2428708
    Level
    76
    Lv. Percent
    42.62%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by Stupes View Post

    Carbs that are put to good use. Carbs that don't just sit there and make you fat.
    So all the above mentioned :3!
    >SNS-Glycophase<
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Rep
  9. Senior Member
    madds87's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  190 lbs.
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,904
    Rep Power
    98806
    Level
    39
    Lv. Percent
    54.66%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Jbry was joking..... And its actually a trick question.
  10. Stupes
    Guest
    Stupes's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by madds87 View Post
    Jbry was joking..... And its actually a trick question.
    Hence my answer.
  11. New Member
    Doughnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    13
    Rep Power
    34
    Level
    3
    Lv. Percent
    62.75%

    Good thread.

    Seeing as we're asking all sorts, is the following scenario realistic?

    A newbie (with good form and nutrition, so not complete newbie) does a cycle of AAS, does a legit PCT, as long as he hasn't passed his natural genetic potential (which obviously is a variable) he would pretty much keep most of his gains?

    So what I'm getting at is could newbies use AAS as a short cut?

    For what it's worth, I'm not trying to do the above, don't think I'll ever dabble with AAS but it doesn't hurt to know about 'the dark side'
  12. Senior Member
    madds87's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  190 lbs.
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,904
    Rep Power
    98806
    Level
    39
    Lv. Percent
    54.66%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Doughnut View Post
    Good thread.

    Seeing as we're asking all sorts, is the following scenario realistic?

    A newbie (with good form and nutrition, so not complete newbie) does a cycle of AAS, does a legit PCT, as long as he hasn't passed his natural genetic potential (which obviously is a variable) he would pretty much keep most of his gains?

    So what I'm getting at is could newbies use AAS as a short cut?

    For what it's worth, I'm not trying to do the above, don't think I'll ever dabble with AAS but it doesn't hurt to know about 'the dark side'
    Yes you could keep it. That's if you are keeping your calories at the point of keeping that new muscle.
  13. Senior Member
    alwaysgaining's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,299
    Rep Power
    1635
    Level
    27
    Lv. Percent
    48.6%
    Achievements Posting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by musclebrah View Post
    I get it now

    If you want to stay above the genetic limit you have to keep cycling for life it's like a lifestyle

    If you use it once and you don't pass your genetic limit you'll keep most of the gains
    and . But once you pass your limit and never cycle again you'll slowly go back to your genetic limit.
    dudo your genetic limit like mine is so f****** huge massive 250 pound it take years to get ther and then cycling and u get huge synthetic muscles mass and to maintain hat u neee gear
  14. Advanced Member
    R1187's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  172 lbs.
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    519
    Rep Power
    33430
    Level
    21
    Lv. Percent
    1.84%

    Quote Originally Posted by alwaysgaining View Post
    dudo your genetic limit like mine is so f****** huge massive 250 pound it take years to get ther and then cycling and u get huge synthetic muscles mass and to maintain hat u neee gear
    The drugs are synthetic; the muscles are not.
  15. Advanced Member
    vassille's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    968
    Rep Power
    48009
    Level
    26
    Lv. Percent
    10.77%

    Quote Originally Posted by SPS View Post
    You are probably right but that is pretty doom and gloom considering the avg Joe is at a "higher" weight(fat) eats way too many carbs and doesn't work out and still manages to live to his 60s, 70s, 80s
    Signs show very early in life as early as 40. Then the meds come into play trying to fix the problem which is prob why ppl tend to live a little longer being sick, crappy life though.
    With steroids this problem is accelerated with the increase of food intake and cholesterol being higher, insulin, blood pressure etc..
    That's why it's important to eat right in accordance to your body type. While off the cycle back off the food and give your body a break to recover.
    I'd say if ppl decide to be on a lot watch your cholesterol closely. If you need to take suplements to correct it do it.
  16. Elite Member
    Celorza's Avatar
    Stats
    5'6"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Age
    23
    Posts
    9,552
    Rep Power
    2428708
    Level
    76
    Lv. Percent
    42.62%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by Doughnut View Post
    Good thread.

    Seeing as we're asking all sorts, is the following scenario realistic?

    A newbie (with good form and nutrition, so not complete newbie) does a cycle of AAS, does a legit PCT, as long as he hasn't passed his natural genetic potential (which obviously is a variable) he would pretty much keep most of his gains?

    So what I'm getting at is could newbies use AAS as a short cut?

    For what it's worth, I'm not trying to do the above, don't think I'll ever dabble with AAS but it doesn't hurt to know about 'the dark side'
    Please do not look for encouragement to start a cycle and enjoy the lifestyle...I do not frown upon AAS at all, but I do not see the point when someone is just a recreational lifter and not a competitive athlete or Pro BodyBuilder (the latter, which is not present in this forum at all).
    >SNS-Glycophase<
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Rep
  17. Advanced Member
    vassille's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    968
    Rep Power
    48009
    Level
    26
    Lv. Percent
    10.77%

    Quote Originally Posted by madds87 View Post
    Yes you could keep it. That's if you are keeping your calories at the point of keeping that new muscle.
    That is correct. And then there is a point that you can go past that and be on anabolics and stay even bigger but you need to eat even more!
    THat's the catch. Trust me after a while being 250lbs tends to be a chore if all you do all day is eat 6-7 meals. You def need to love bodybuilding to do this.
  18. Advanced Member
    vassille's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    968
    Rep Power
    48009
    Level
    26
    Lv. Percent
    10.77%

    Quote Originally Posted by jbryand101b View Post
    what are good carbs?
    I consider good carbs natural carbs that you can find in the ground or pick off a tree. So if you are into eating carbs to bulk I usually go for patatoes, fruits, vegetables, wild rice things like that. That's just me
  19. Elite Member
    Celorza's Avatar
    Stats
    5'6"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Age
    23
    Posts
    9,552
    Rep Power
    2428708
    Level
    76
    Lv. Percent
    42.62%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by vassille View Post
    I consider good carbs natural carbs that you can find in the ground or pick off a tree. So if you are into eating carbs to bulk I usually go for patatoes, fruits, vegetables, wild rice things like that. That's just me
    Potatoes, rice and veggies grow on trees...yup I'll take cake, brownies and muffins with a side order of pancakes to go please!
    >SNS-Glycophase<
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Rep
  20. Advanced Member
    vassille's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    968
    Rep Power
    48009
    Level
    26
    Lv. Percent
    10.77%

    Quote Originally Posted by Celorza View Post
    Potatoes, rice and veggies grow on trees...yup I'll take cake, brownies and muffins with a side order of pancakes to go please!
    yeah I used to kill pancakes from Mcdonalds but that;s thing of the past lol

    It's proccessed vs unprocessed i was trying to get at.
  21. New Member
    Claytonr4's Avatar
    Stats
    6'2"  212 lbs.
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    10
    Rep Power
    35
    Level
    2
    Lv. Percent
    98.5%

    Personally the feeling and confidence makes it a very ad ducting drug. I love the physical outcome but nothing feels better than being ON
  22. New Member
    Captn_the's Avatar
    Stats
    6'2"  235 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    220
    Rep Power
    23983
    Level
    14
    Lv. Percent
    45.81%

    Are steroids a long term thing? Thoughts


    Quote Originally Posted by vassille View Post
    Are you stupid bro or just ignorant or both?
    To be at a higher weight all the time and being on anabolics long-term requires a lot of food. All that food puts a lot of strain on you digestive system, including your pancreas and your organs in general. To eat 400-500-600g of carbs a day requires a ton of insulin. Dont you think this insulin has some kind of effect on cells?
    Maybe you should get off the juice sometimes and do a little more research instead of making statements that shows your level of knowledge and ignorance.
    Lol at your ignorance. By your reckoning, larger guys are prone to diabetes because they have to ingest more carbs over their lifetime.

    Who the fk eats 400-500g of sugar a day? Answer a fat fk. Outside of the training window Bodybuilders eat brown rice, sweet potatoes etc that have a low insulin response.

    Back your statements up with some studies, or sit back and stfu n00b.
  23. Professional Member
    fueledpassion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,594
    Rep Power
    700182
    Level
    54
    Lv. Percent
    80.71%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    the best supplement is food. Eat plenty of it. Eat the right kind. Have plenty of micronutrients in there to keep everything working properly.

    You'll keep all the muscle. Muscle loss is as simple as a caloric deficit. Glycogen retention and keeping a low bodyfat are what steroids are good for. They don't cause you to grow beyond what you could do alone. They only speed up the process & make it easier to do. GH and insulin is what causes you to go beyond what your body could ever do on its own.

    People really need to understand the sex steroids do not proliferate the muscle cells and cause growth. They help channel more food to muscle cells and less to body fat when digested, among other things like increasing oxygen density in the vessels for optimal training and recovery. They do a number of things surrounding muscle growth, but never actually grow the muscle (except in glycogen retention), which isn't muscle mass but energy stored up as sugars.

    Testosterone (and it's alternatives) for muscle training

    GH & Insulin for muscle growth
  24. Advanced Member
    vassille's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    968
    Rep Power
    48009
    Level
    26
    Lv. Percent
    10.77%

    Quote Originally Posted by Captn_the View Post
    Lol at your ignorance. By your reckoning, larger guys are prone to diabetes because they have to ingest more carbs over their lifetime.

    Who the fk eats 400-500g of sugar a day? Answer a fat fk. Outside of the training window Bodybuilders eat brown rice, sweet potatoes etc that have a low insulin response.

    Back your statements up with some studies, or sit back and stfu n00b.
    Eating sweet patatoes or brown rice turns into glucose. Eating table sugar turns into glucose as well. Difference of the 2 is breakdown rate. The end result is the same eat too much and you suffer the same consequences..dumb ass.
    Wow bro, you really need to hit the books. THis is so basic.
  25. Senior Member
    lexmuscle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,062
    Rep Power
    147896
    Level
    30
    Lv. Percent
    65.85%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Eating popcorn while watching bro-wrestling haha
  26. Professional Member
    fueledpassion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,594
    Rep Power
    700182
    Level
    54
    Lv. Percent
    80.71%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by vassille View Post
    Eating sweet patatoes or brown rice turns into glucose. Eating table sugar turns into glucose as well. Difference of the 2 is breakdown rate. The end result is the same eat too much and you suffer the same consequences..dumb ass.
    Wow bro, you really need to hit the books. THis is so basic.

    Your answer conflicts with your argument. If I ate 500g of sweet potato vs. 500g of table sugar, the results would be different.

    The faster food breaks down into usuable glucose, the greater the insulin secretion by the pancreas. The greater the release of insulin, the greater amount of food gets put up into fat cells, assuming you were't carb depleted. If carb depleted, you might get lucky and store up the vast majority as glycogen in the muscle and liver. But the chances are slim. You'll also have a sugar crash, because that much insulin equates to your body going from a really high blood sugar count to a really low blood sugar count within a few minutes.

    So essentially, you supported your foe's response by agreeing that each break down at different rates. This is why certain complex carbs are also called "slow-releasing carbs". The slower the release, the less likely to have an insulin surge, which means a more steady flow of glucose - which ultimately means a more desireable nutrient partitioning.

    RECAP:

    1) Table sugar and sweet potato both convert to glucose, albeit at different rates

    2) The rate of breakdown has a great influence on the amount of insulin released at any one time. If a surge of sugar rushes into the blood (which by the way is toxic to your blood), the greater the insulin response thus leading to fat storage.

    3) Since a sweet potato breaks down slower than table sugar, sweet potatoes illicit a more gradual insulin response, which leads to less fat storage and more constant fuel & energy for the body.

    4) The end result is not the same. We could do an experiment if you like.

    a) you could eat table sugar carbs @ 2g per lb of body weight per day for 4 weeks

    b) I could eat sweet potato carbs @ 2g per lb of body weight per day for 4 weeks

    Let's see who gets fatter quicker. And lets also see who turns pre-diabetic quicker, too. If you really believed what you said before to the other guy, you should have no problem with attempting this quick study. We might could come to the conclusion in just a few short days really - you might not even last that long before going into a diabetic coma, lol.
  27. Elite Member
    Celorza's Avatar
    Stats
    5'6"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Age
    23
    Posts
    9,552
    Rep Power
    2428708
    Level
    76
    Lv. Percent
    42.62%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by fueledpassion View Post

    Your answer conflicts with your argument. If I ate 500g of sweet potato vs. 500g of table sugar, the results would be different.

    The faster food breaks down into usuable glucose, the greater the insulin secretion by the pancreas. The greater the release of insulin, the greater amount of food gets put up into fat cells, assuming you were't carb depleted. If carb depleted, you might get lucky and store up the vast majority as glycogen in the muscle and liver. But the chances are slim. You'll also have a sugar crash, because that much insulin equates to your body going from a really high blood sugar count to a really low blood sugar count within a few minutes.

    So essentially, you supported your foe's response by agreeing that each break down at different rates. This is why certain complex carbs are also called "slow-releasing carbs". The slower the release, the less likely to have an insulin surge, which means a more steady flow of glucose - which ultimately means a more desireable nutrient partitioning.

    RECAP:

    1) Table sugar and sweet potato both convert to glucose, albeit at different rates

    2) The rate of breakdown has a great influence on the amount of insulin released at any one time. If a surge of sugar rushes into the blood (which by the way is toxic to your blood), the greater the insulin response thus leading to fat storage.

    3) Since a sweet potato breaks down slower than table sugar, sweet potatoes illicit a more gradual insulin response, which leads to less fat storage and more constant fuel & energy for the body.

    4) The end result is not the same. We could do an experiment if you like.

    a) you could eat table sugar carbs @ 2g per lb of body weight per day for 4 weeks

    b) I could eat sweet potato carbs @ 2g per lb of body weight per day for 4 weeks

    Let's see who gets fatter quicker. And lets also see who turns pre-diabetic quicker, too.
    Outcomes would be different? Please show me a study proving that !
    >SNS-Glycophase<
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Rep
  28. Stupes
    Guest
    Stupes's Avatar

    If anyone thinks refined, manufactured, table sugar is the same as eating a sweet potato - that's your own problem.

    Common sense here. People get lost in the weeds with these fads. Holy sh*t
  29. Professional Member
    fueledpassion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,594
    Rep Power
    700182
    Level
    54
    Lv. Percent
    80.71%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Celorza View Post
    Outcomes would be different? Please show me a study proving that !
    Are you serious man? Sweet potatoes make you look like this:


    http://contest.bodybuilding.com/gall...e/will/page/14#

    Seriously, I lived off sweet potatoes during comp prep.

    I think the point needs to be made that too much insulin is what causes fat storage. Generally, the slower your food digests, the smaller the insulin secretion (as it pertains to carbs and sugars).

    Now this doesn't mean that fats get used as energy immediately upon digestion. They have a different metabolic fate than carbs and protein.
  30. Elite Member
    Celorza's Avatar
    Stats
    5'6"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Age
    23
    Posts
    9,552
    Rep Power
    2428708
    Level
    76
    Lv. Percent
    42.62%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by Stupes View Post
    If anyone thinks refined, manufactured, table sugar is the same as eating a sweet potato - that's your own problem.

    Common sense here. People get lost in the weeds with these fads. Holy sh*t
    Hm...many studies that have been posted in this forum prove that glycemic index doesn't affect body composition...how do you explain that then?
    >SNS-Glycophase<
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Rep
  31. Professional Member
    fueledpassion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,594
    Rep Power
    700182
    Level
    54
    Lv. Percent
    80.71%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Glycemic index is junk. It also says that ice cream is a non offender, too. We could do an experiment on that one too and see who gets fatter - ice cream vs potatoes, lol.

    Glycemic index also says that maltodextrin has a really high GI, like 106-130, which is stupid high. Yet the maltodextrin molecule is more complex, gummy and in general takes longer to digest than table sugar (which has a GI in the 60's) and other refined carbs. I have tested the two on myself and I know now that the GI diets are not telling the whole story. I think GI reflects how much insulin per unit measure of that food is released, but it doesn't actually reflect how long and slow the release itself takes.

    Malto dextrin is a good case-in-point. I get a strong insulin response but it happens over a stretched out period of time, which allows for sustainable energy which is perfect for training. I do the same with straight sugar and 20 minutes later I'm having a sugar crash and needing more food for energy.

    So I guess I agree with you on the GI thing. Here is its definition:

    A number representing the ability of a food, relative to that of glucose, to increase the level of glucose in the blood.

    So just because something has a greater ability to increase blood glucose does not necessarily tell us how long it takes to do it. Sweet potatoes and maltodextrin both increase blood glucose and hold it steady, causing a steady stream of insulin to be released throughout the digestive process.

    Yet it doesn't equate to fat gains, either. Because a trickle of insulin for several hours is very anabolic in nature as to where something like table sugar (which breaks down extremely fast) is a sure fire way to store up as fat since too much sugar gets released into the blood in too short of a time period. That causes a surge of insulin, and a blood sugar that yo-yo's throughout the day.
  32. Stupes
    Guest
    Stupes's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Celorza View Post
    Hm...many studies that have been posted in this forum prove that glycemic index doesn't affect body composition...how do you explain that then?
    I explain that by saying that the GI is a fad too - and I didn't mention the idiotic GI at all.

    But table sugar has no nutrients, no vitamins, nothing. It's only redeeming quality is that it acts quickly and can be a catalyst to carry good stuff to muscle immediately after/during a workout. Very specialized situation and you can use other sources of carbs for that purpose rather than refined sugar.

    Getting lost in the weeds....
  33. Stupes
    Guest
    Stupes's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by fueledpassion View Post
    Glycemic index is junk. It also says that ice cream is a non offender, too. We could do an experiment on that one too and see who gets fatter - ice cream vs potatoes, lol.

    Glycemic index also says that maltodextrin has a really high GI, like 106-130, which is stupid high. Yet the maltodextrin molecule is more complex, gummy and in general takes longer to digest than table sugar (which has a GI in the 60's) and other refined carbs. I have tested the two on myself and I know now that the GI diets are not telling the whole story. I think GI reflects how much insulin per unit measure of that food is released, but it doesn't actually reflect how long and slow the release itself takes.

    Malto dextrin is a good case-in-point. I get a strong insulin response but it happens over a stretched out period of time, which allows for sustainable energy which is perfect for training. I do the same with straight sugar and 20 minutes later I'm having a sugar crash and needing more food for energy.

    So I guess I agree with you on the GI thing. Here is its definition:

    A number representing the ability of a food, relative to that of glucose, to increase the level of glucose in the blood.

    So just because something has a greater ability to increase blood glucose does not necessarily tell us how long it takes to do it. Sweet potatoes and maltodextrin both increase blood glucose and hold it steady, causing a steady stream of insulin to be released throughout the digestive process.

    Yet it doesn't equate to fat gains, either. Because a trickle of insulin for several hours is very anabolic in nature as to where something like table sugar (which breaks down extremely fast) is a sure fire way to store up as fat since too much sugar gets released into the blood in too short of a time period. That causes a surge of insulin, and a blood sugar that yo-yo's throughout the day.
    Agreed - the whole GI thing will be gone in a few years.

    Carbs are the in thing right now - but it cycles - it was fats 5 years ago.

    In the Roman times - look at what people were the biggest and strongest. The northern Europeans and certain African tribes - the hunters and gatherers who ate leaves, nuts, berries and meat. The agrarian societies who ate breads and wheat were smaller. What does that say? Something to think about perhaps.
  34. Senior Member
    aceroni's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,700
    Rep Power
    1115253
    Level
    55
    Lv. Percent
    12.23%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by fueledpassion View Post

    Are you serious man? Sweet potatoes make you look like this:

    http://contest.bodybuilding.com/gall...e/will/page/14#

    Seriously, I lived off sweet potatoes during comp prep.
    ewww, you're telling me I'll look like that if I eat sweet potatoes?

    I was hoping to be much more cut,
    No thanks, I'll stick to table sugar..

    Haha, just kidding man you look great, but for some constructive criticism your legs could have came in harder,
    Either a, you could have been leaner
    Or b, you could have been drier.
    Please don't take offense to this, it's not meant to be derogatory, just constructive criticism, take it for what it's worth

    Quote Originally Posted by Stupes View Post

    Agreed - the whole GI thing will be gone in a few years.

    Carbs are the in thing right now - but it cycles - it was fats 5 years ago.

    In the Roman times - look at what people were the biggest and strongest. The northern Europeans and certain African tribes - the hunters and gatherers who ate leaves, nuts, berries and meat. The agrarian societies who ate breads and wheat were smaller. What does that say? Something to think about perhaps.
    Also, i'm sure diet played a role here, but not to quite the extent that genetics did.
  35. Stupes
    Guest
    Stupes's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by aceroni View Post
    Also, i'm sure diet played a role here, but not to quite the extent that genetics did.
    Perhaps - maybe it was the hunting lifestyle that also contributed to being bigger and stronger - more active and more need for strength/speed. But at the very least - that type of diet maintained and supported the bigger, stronger people of the time.
  36. Professional Member
    fueledpassion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,594
    Rep Power
    700182
    Level
    54
    Lv. Percent
    80.71%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by aceroni View Post
    ewww, you're telling me I'll look like that if I eat sweet potatoes?

    I was hoping to be much more cut,
    No thanks, I'll stick to table sugar..

    Haha, just kidding man you look great, but for some constructive criticism your legs could have came in harder,
    Either a, you could have been leaner
    Or b, you could have been drier.
    Please don't take offense to this, it's not meant to be derogatory, just constructive criticism, take it for what it's worth



    Also, i'm sure diet played a role here, but not to quite the extent that genetics did.

    Haha no offense was taken. U r tellin me what I already knew before I walked on stage. The next 18 months is dedicated to legs. I've added an inch to them since then and hope to add another two to three by next year.

    My upper body, especially my shoulders, has always come in correctly. Yet I was dry as I need to be in those pics. In fact, I was depleted. Hind sight, things would've been different no doubt. Looking forward I hope to pack on another 30lbs of good stuff - and mainly in the trunks.
  37. Senior Member
    aceroni's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,700
    Rep Power
    1115253
    Level
    55
    Lv. Percent
    12.23%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by fueledpassion View Post

    Haha no offense was taken. U r tellin me what I already knew before I walked on stage. The next 18 months is dedicated to legs. I've added an inch to them since then and hope to add another two to three by next year.

    My upper body, especially my shoulders, has always come in correctly. Yet I was dry as I need to be in those pics. In fact, I was depleted. Hind sight, things would've been different no doubt. Looking forward I hope to pack on another 30lbs of good stuff - and mainly in the trunks.
    Cool man i'm Glad you took that so well most people freak out at the slightest criticism.
  38. Professional Member
    fueledpassion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,594
    Rep Power
    700182
    Level
    54
    Lv. Percent
    80.71%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by aceroni View Post
    Cool man i'm Glad you took that so well most people freak out at the slightest criticism.
    The shortcoming in my legs has done wonders for my motivation in the gym though. Because of this reality, I have now laid out the next 6-8 months of training program to get bigger and stronger.

    Until about 3 weeks ago, I had been seriously lacking in strength training. Unfortunately, my body stopped reacting well to volume training. And since then, with nothin but a cruise control of Test-E, I have seen tremendous improvements in strength & muscle density not to mention a few solid lbs of mass.

    I surprised myself with a deadlift pull of 395lbs last night, weighing in at only 162lbs. I didn't think I could lift that much. I'm curious to see what I could do with SD or Phera.
  39. Senior Member
    madds87's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  190 lbs.
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,904
    Rep Power
    98806
    Level
    39
    Lv. Percent
    54.66%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by vassille View Post

    Signs show very early in life as early as 40. Then the meds come into play trying to fix the problem which is prob why ppl tend to live a little longer being sick, crappy life though.
    With steroids this problem is accelerated with the increase of food intake and cholesterol being higher, insulin, blood pressure etc..
    That's why it's important to eat right in accordance to your body type. While off the cycle back off the food and give your body a break to recover.
    I'd say if ppl decide to be on a lot watch your cholesterol closely. If you need to take suplements to correct it do it.
    How can you say it accelerates?
  40. Professional Member
    fueledpassion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,594
    Rep Power
    700182
    Level
    54
    Lv. Percent
    80.71%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    People who train consistently will likely have a better cholesterol profile than those who don't at that age (40+). In fact, training is about the only natural thing you can do to combat cholesterol issues anyways since most of it is genetic makeup. Food has a lesser impact on cholesterol levels, unless you consider the Daniel's Diet. Lack of exercise has a great impact on it though.

    Steroids at 40+ will likely be TRT levels which is between 100-250mg per week, which isn't high enough to have sides like that but is enough to get an old man off his butt and go to the gym.
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-24-2009, 06:05 PM
  2. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-19-2004, 05:47 AM
  3. PH use and long term suppression
    By badbart in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-26-2004, 11:14 AM
  4. Long-term Effect of Heavy Drug-Use on BB
    By MrBean in forum General Chat
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 12-15-2003, 06:01 PM
  5. Long term steroid abuse
    By Dwight Schrute in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-12-2003, 07:15 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Log in
Log in