Is ZMA right for me??
- 01-10-2005, 09:56 AM
- 01-10-2005, 10:23 AM
Originally Posted by shootmeagain
Anyway, I think ZMA is "ok" as far as ensuring you are not deficient in either mineral and possibly ensuring optimum natural test levels (maybe even PCT for hormone users), but I doubt anyone at your age will see any significant benefit if your diet is in check and you take a multivitamin.
01-10-2005, 10:47 AM
TotalyJacked, let me try to put all of this in as simple a form as I can. Im no expert, ok? But I have some experience with both ZMA and Creatine and I do a lot of reading from people who know more than I do. This is in PLAIN terms. One on one.
1) monohydrate is so old school that......Im not even going to get into it. That type of creatine has more negatives than positives. CEE is the latest and best form of creatine. It has all of the positives of good creatines like SwoleV2 and V12 with virtually NONE of the negatives of monohydrate. And that inclused the water retention. If you're worried about things "down the line" then I suggest you also stop eating a lot of the foods you eat because chances are that some of them are going to be bad for you "down the line" as well. That just seems to be the nature of things lately. Someone is always coming out with a study that says "this is bad". Hell, Im waiting for someone to come out with a study that says water will cause cancer down the road. Nothing is perfect, everything has its downside. Live with it. Chances are you're probably doing more harm to yourself with monohydrate due to all that crap that comes with it: cramps, bloating, headaches, etc. I said CHANCES ARE, I did not say "definite". I just know that its an old school supplement and better things have come along since.
2) ZMA is NOT going to put any mass on you or anything of the sort. Not by itself its not. As a mater of fact, NO supplement is going to do that. What supplements do is help take your diet and or workouts to the next level and therefore help your body make more muscle. They dont do anything in and of themselves to make muscle. Not even steroids. As Ronnie Coleman once told some wiseass reporter "Do you think you can just take drugs and look like me?" What ZMA WILL do is help you sleep deeper and better and THAT spells better workout recoveries because REM sleep is where we rest the best. Better recoveries means better results. There is NO rest like sleep. So ZMA has indirect positive benefits, just not direct benefits.
Out of both of these supps that you ask about, ZMA is probably the least "dangerous" and also probably the most helpful. I dont see any reason why anyone would not take it.
01-10-2005, 12:20 PM
01-10-2005, 01:59 PM
Thanks, wasted. Its always hard coming onto a new board and giving advise of that type because every board is settled into a groove as to how things are done. Nothing wrong with that at all, just makes it kinda nervous. Hope I can continue to contribute.
01-10-2005, 02:11 PM
01-10-2005, 03:24 PM
Similar Forum Threads
- By southpaw41 in forum Male Anti-Aging MedicineReplies: 20Last Post: 07-21-2010, 07:53 PM
- By chobbs4 in forum IGF-1/GHReplies: 4Last Post: 05-11-2010, 01:02 AM
- By BurghHardcore in forum AnabolicsReplies: 2Last Post: 04-21-2009, 06:53 PM
- By SpikeDC in forum BulkingReplies: 9Last Post: 12-03-2007, 07:21 PM
- By Jjans in forum PheromonesReplies: 3Last Post: 09-27-2007, 03:30 PM