Topic of the Week: Is going on HRT still natural to you?
- Thread starter Admin
- Start date
Driven2lift
Legend
In terms of fairness in bodybuilding and sports yes I do
But the use of exogenous hormones in any scenario s technically not natural
But the use of exogenous hormones in any scenario s technically not natural
Otheridstaken
Active member
If the therapy restores you to being natural I would say so, if it puts you above your natural levels then no.
NoAddedHmones
Well-known member
Pretty much impossible to answer seeing as "Natural" is a very ambigious term that doesn't have a clear definition. Kind of like "clean eating". its completely subjective to peoples views and biases.
This was the discussion I had. I said if you are restoring normal levels, its still natural. The other guy said no....no matter what, if you add anything its not considered natural anymore. He uses the term "natural" to mean whatever you naturally are and for older men, thats lower test. If was an interesting convo...
Otheridstaken
Active member
Well in my view if you need TRT, because without it you are not the man you 'should' be, then you are unnatural, and the TRT would restore you to natural status. Everyone is bombarded with toxins that play havoc on hormones and other things anyway. So really how are most people natural these days?
Otheridstaken
Active member
Double speak? Truly believing there is nothing wrong with using a steroid and at the same time be against it's use in the public eye. Maybe something related to children. Children are more prone to the worship of sports stars. If they keep an honest public image it's better for the sport and merchandise sales. Hmm....not sure where that puts the use of other drugs like cocaine. If someone uses cocaine the response is one of "get it together." or "hope he gets the right help." Any PED use and the sky is falling.
NewAgeMayan
Well-known member
hmmm, interesting philosophical topic
I think I agree with what NAH and OtherId have said...the term 'natural' is obviously not an absolute one but relative to some sample or group, and to the time (evolutionary 'stage') and age of that group. Lots of variables. In a nutshell, I dont think there is a 'God decreed' optimal hormonal level, only that which enables an organism to survive the environment its ancestors have adapted to.
So what level we deem 'healthy' and 'optimal' is somewhat arbitrary, and so too what we also deem to be 'natural'.
I think I agree with what NAH and OtherId have said...the term 'natural' is obviously not an absolute one but relative to some sample or group, and to the time (evolutionary 'stage') and age of that group. Lots of variables. In a nutshell, I dont think there is a 'God decreed' optimal hormonal level, only that which enables an organism to survive the environment its ancestors have adapted to.
So what level we deem 'healthy' and 'optimal' is somewhat arbitrary, and so too what we also deem to be 'natural'.
Hockeyaus33
Active member
From a pure definition of natural standpoint, anything taken exogenous besides food or food derivatives is unnatural, even if the HRT is done to restore someone's level to what the "normal" amount for their age range is. Letting the body run its course, whether its different from the general population or not, is what is truly natural.
From a competitve bodybuilding standpoint, as long as the hormone levels stay within the natural body building limit of the competitors then the person would probably be considered a natural bodybuilder still
From a competitve bodybuilding standpoint, as long as the hormone levels stay within the natural body building limit of the competitors then the person would probably be considered a natural bodybuilder still
NoAddedHmones
Well-known member
So anyone who has taken Melatonin in their life are instantly no longer natural?
Jiigzz
Legend
NoAddedHmones
Well-known member
Jiigzz
Legend
EMPIREMIND
Well-known member
The term natural is very hard to pinpoint. If you have ever consumed animal product that were raised with hormones, which is not information we always have access too, than it can be said your not natural. Its very hard to draw a line. Personally i do not think any use of exogenous hormones can still be considered natural, sorry. If older men naturally have lower test as they age, then it can in no way be consisdered natural.
Hockeyaus33
Active member
seems silly doesn't it? But if you we are going by pure definition of natural then it would not be natural to take melatonin.
From a bodybuilding world definition, of course we still consider melatonin natural.
I assume most people in this thread are going into this debate with a "bodybuilding world" mindset where the limits of nattyness will stop at prohormones and/or even SARMS. In that case of course the definition of natty that I provided sounds silly. But I came in here to mix it up a bit. Those bozos that claim taking whey protein and creatine make you unnatty are often made fun of in the mainstream bodybuilding world, but they also make a valid point
Hockeyaus33
Active member
Yes but you were asking for it when you made the topic. I think its a good debate. The issue with asking a bunch of bodybuilders what natural means to them is we are desensitized by the supplement industry and culture to the point where we automatically become fixated on steroid hormones when we think of natty vs unnatty.
But, ask any doctor and they will tell you that it is actually pretty unnatural to consume 5g of creatine a day or protein thats been tinkered with in a laboratory to maximize absorption rate, regardless of whether it is unhealthy or not.
Otheridstaken
Active member
Nothing natural about GMO foods either. Or shooting gold into apples to prevent decay. Fluoride and jet fuel in the water. Is anything natural anymore?
People want to say steroids are bad while holding a beer in one and a cigarette in the other. Hypocrisy is a wonderful thing.
People want to say steroids are bad while holding a beer in one and a cigarette in the other. Hypocrisy is a wonderful thing.
Jiigzz
Legend
Its more or less a buzz word used to describe someone who doesnt use exogenous hormones for the purpose of altering the bodys natural capacity to build muscle and drop body fat.
Athletes use EPO for the purpose of enhancing performance beyond what is normally attainable through training. IMO the intent of use is what is important.
Which is the point.....is there a universal definition? Are we using WADA's specifications? The good bro's? Who's?
It only reinforces that the standards and rules really are not consistent, hence the issues will continue. I never understand why test is considered bad at a "normal" level but cortisone shots are just fine.
NoAddedHmones
Well-known member
See here, while i understand what you are saying but you coined your version of what you believe 'natural' means based on conscience (sub-conscience) biases. If we look at the actual oxford dictionary defined term of 'natural'
"Existing in or derived from nature; not made or caused by humankind:
carrots contain a natural antiseptic
natural disasters such as earthquakes"
That in itself is ambiguous which again brings it back to the individuals persona view on the meaning, which again will be different to each person.
I can interpret the above as testosterone was not caused by mankind and exists in nature, hence its natural.
Chuck Diesel
Are you Diesel?
No. Everytime someone juices they call it HRT
Chuck Diesel
Are you Diesel?
They are just as bad as anything else you named. Only thing is sports wise, you don't get an unfair competitive advantage from cigarettes. The PED argument is about an unfair advantage and i think ppl turn it into a "well so and so is bad for u also" ussue.
Jiigzz
Legend
Thats my angle as well.
McCrew530
Well-known member
I would say yes they are natural because our body's intake unnatural levels of estrogen through out side sources.
Invalid Link Removed
So if it is natural for our bodies to be ingesting these hormones, why would it be unnatural to balance out our hormones through science in a similar way that our bodies try to do naturally.
Invalid Link Removed
So if it is natural for our bodies to be ingesting these hormones, why would it be unnatural to balance out our hormones through science in a similar way that our bodies try to do naturally.
But how do you define cheating? The point being, the rules don't make any sense.
McCrew530
Well-known member
Then is it cheeting if they eat more? Is it cheeting if they have a coach that trains them in a way that works better? At then end of the day there are a lot more factors that come into play than where your test levels sit at.
Shasow
Banned
There are more factors if you want to nip pick but at some point you have to boil it down to its essence. I believe I just stated it. So that's the starting point. Is it cheating? Does this guy have an unfair advantage vie means that are classified as ILLEGAL PEDS?
Food is natural. Training better is open for all to learn. I think intuitively we know the difference between taking creatine and anadrol that's why one is banned the other is not.
Just some thoughts for debate.
Then once again, what is the difference between testosterone to achieve normal levels and a cortisone shot. Both are prescription only.
One works in 4-6 weeks IF you train...the other is instant. How is the drug that lets run if you have a blown knee not cheating vs normal levels of test?!?!
One works in 4-6 weeks IF you train...the other is instant. How is the drug that lets run if you have a blown knee not cheating vs normal levels of test?!?!
Chuck Diesel
Are you Diesel?
The rules are like the law and the constitution, they dont make sense and for sports are there to help level the playing field. Its like no corked or aluminum bats in baseball. Also like how all these Nascar teams try to push the rules and get penalized. If you compete, there are rules. But sometimes people "well these rules suck so imma use product xyz" ok well then dont compete because the only people who dont see it as an ufair advantage are the ones using it. Ive competed wresting, Judo, powerlifting and NPC bodybuilding. Ive heard it all.
Now for the average person on AM, the argument is more like if weed is legal why cant I have my prohormones. Thats a dif argument and in the US yeah people should have the choice to use whatever they want to a certain extent, but here the other side is liability. Someone always had to be liable. 13 year olds who smoke dont often get lung cancer at 13. 13 year olds who use superdrol for 8 weeks will end up w a fcked up liver and be on HRT almost forever
Rules constantly change based on new information and viewpoints, therefore I question them. They literally don't make sense when it comes to supplements/ped's/steroids.
Chuck Diesel
Are you Diesel?
Also cheating is prob defined as doing something usually by not abiding by the rules to purposly gain a,competitive advantage. If I am a marathon runner and decide to have a high oxygen blood transfusion a day before the New York marathon....thats cheating. Its cheating bc its blood doping and all the other runnners didnt go get one
Shasow
Banned
I think those type of questions have to be left up to the person in charge to set.
If it were I would allow TRT for those that fell short if the healthy range and cortisone injections for those that needed it.
But that's just ME. I believe that's kinda common sence decision making though. But again that would have to be left to the actual decision maker.
F#ck!!! (tourette's)
If it were I would allow TRT for those that fell short if the healthy range and cortisone injections for those that needed it.
But that's just ME. I believe that's kinda common sence decision making though. But again that would have to be left to the actual decision maker.
F#ck!!! (tourette's)
Chuck Diesel
Are you Diesel?
Well they make sense to a degree. For instance a dietary supplement has to be naturally occuring somewhere or an amino or vitamin. Everything else cant be labeled a dietary supplement. Its not technically dietary. Now that doesnt mean its a class 3 drug either but its not dietary. You want to see some crazy rules, look at the UK registry for what herbs are legal and whatare not
Yet platelet rich plasma treatments which increase recovery MUCH faster than steroids is legal.
Now I can perform and recover much faster than my genetic potential by prescription drugs and none are steroids and all are legal.
But steroids are bad....
My argument has nothing to do with supplements. WADA banned deer antler velvet. That in itself shows how clueless those who make rules are.
Chuck Diesel
Are you Diesel?
I saw a,post abt WADA but cant find it. I sponsor a WADA bodybuilder. He cant take next to nothing. So he either competes in WADA tested events where not many guys are over 200lbs ripped.....or he can go non-test NPC where,people are 5'7" 220lbs w 2% bodyfat.
Chuck Diesel
Are you Diesel?
If someone wants steroids then they can go get a prescription for them....they,just better not plan on competing bc the compition isnt all on steroids. To your benifit. The USOC lifted the caffeine limit allowed by athletes........
And that's his choice...and I understand when you chose to do that you have to abide by the rules.
I just think what they seem legal and illegal ridiculous at times. Like I said, treatments that help recovery that are prescription injections are fine...yet steroids are not. It seems odd.
Chuck Diesel
Are you Diesel?
Steroids are prescribed also....to animals. Most of them are actually developed for horses etc. Not humans. A lot of sports dont allow injectioms. Pacquiao coudnt get one b4 that Mayweather fight. Its not like the only thing banned are anabolic steroids. Some nootropics are banned.
Do you mean "fine" as in everyday life or in sports bc those are two dif things that seem to b always grouped together.
That's my point.
Steroids were developed to help recovery and they are legal by prescription. They are banned.
Cortisone shots and platelet rich therapy are injections by prescription and they are legal in most sports.
Why?
Chuck Diesel
Are you Diesel?
Well if i dont need Cortisone and I take a shot....it will not enhance my performance. Some sports dont allow them such as boxing. They also probably treat it as a pain reliever like ibuprofen or acetaminophen. Idk. Cortisone isnt allowed before a boxing match title fight
And if you take steroids and don't lift, nothing happens.
Cortisone shots are legal in most sports.
Platelet rich therapy is legal in most sports.
Both have a much more profound effect in a short period of time than any steroid will.
Big_sxc
Member
I believe that steroids produce a growth which can genetically alter your normal biological limit. Platelet injections wouldn't allow you to grow like steroid use. Cortisol shots allow recovery but they also hinder recover and thin cartlidge.
The people that decide what is prescription and what gets tested for human use like The fda in America as example. Or the tga in Australia. Don't develop for sports. They develop for quality of life (and profits to some degree) So because steroids can't be used in sports then all prescription shouldn't be?? And specific to the sport it would also matter what you can and cannot take right? Mr Olympia is an sport.. U can use PED's.
So do you believe WADA talks to the FDA? Of course. I'm sure there is also some other forms of relationship between the 2 entities but still both have guidelines that accommodate for each individual purpose.
But to the blatant argument i would say its because of the rate and type of growth from "steroids".
McCrew530
Well-known member
If one was to determine a 100% balanced average of what a "normal testosterone level was" and they were to eliminate the range that is currently set up, society would look at low test as a disability in the same light as we look at low mental function or low attention span. But it is because people can still function, some what, with low test that people look at TRT as an enhancement more than a treatment of a medical condition.