newest muscletech breakthrough
- Thread starter Markos4
- Start date
- Status
blacklac
Well-known member
cbsharpe
Well-known member
Bro, I'm not even gonna ask! LOL!
Markos4
Member
Because it was kai Greene's secret weapon to win the mr Olympia(even though he didn't)lol
Markos4
Member
Kai made it himself.LOL
thelast10
Member
I loved how it said PHD Scientist... not even Dr. so and so, also I am seeing Muscletech starting to put up logging promos for this, 3 month long log, so I am assuming it's not something that you notice too quick... I could be wrong tho...
bolt10
Well-known member
Probably because the log opportunity is to run it with the same 12 week plan as the study.....
USPlabsRep
Board Sponsor
Funny to think 16lbs in 3 months is a slow process....
fightnews
Well-known member
I doubt anyones gaining that of this sup. maybe if they have muscle memory going on or something
kissdadookie
Well-known member
With the study design, it's pretty evident that the HMB-FA was the main factor for the gains and fat loss because the placebo group didn't come anywhere near the HMB-FA group.
fightnews
Well-known member
Ihear yo bro but if the study is correct then HMB-FA is going to be better then mega doses of testosterone. I just don't believe it but hope I'm wrong. Im sure ill give it a run at some point anyway I always do.
kissdadookie
Well-known member
Not really, the physical stimuli the participants had was pretty intense (looks like it was simple and standard workout routines but it really wasn't in terms of intensity). If they pushed test subjects whom were on the juice, it's possible that results would have been even better (remember, the testosterone study that people refer to was basically using non-trained individuals, let's face it, non-trained individuals are not going to be push all that hard as they are super sensitive to exercise to begin with).
People don't seem to realize that the testosterone study and the HMB-FA study really can not be compared to each other because 1) different training levels used in the studies (testosterone used basically untrained, HMB-FA used trained) and 2) the workout protocols were completely different. You're basically comparing apples with oranges there.
The failed logic people are using when comparing the testosterone study with the HMB-FA study IMO is the usual linear thinking flaw. It would appear that they already have a preconceived notion that testosterone works very well and is even automatic at building muscle so if you give someone t, then it must be true that if they even go near weights, they will grow quickly (I'm grossly generalizing here to make a point). However, physical stimuli is still needed and there is a good connection between how much growth you get from the volume and intensity you use, even if on the juice. But the study designs here were very different and it would appear that the testosterone study really didn't push the participants anywhere near as hard as in the HMB-FA study. Let's put it this way, many many many people are taking goodness knows how many chemical anabolics, but there's not an ocean of Yates or Coleman out there.
Jiigzz
Legend
This
thelast10
Member
16 lbs in 3months obv wouldn't (well 16lbs of LBM in 3 months isn't slow, I could put on 30-40+lbs in 3 months if I wanted too, but it certainly wouldn't be clean) Here is the Mandatory training regimen they want the loggers doing throughout the 12 week cycle Invalid Link Removed , I forgot the exact macro breakdown they want you to do as well. I guess they have their reasons behind this training and the macro breakdown they want you to eat, but I would like to see how it works for people on the training/eating they had been doing and see the benefits from that... Guess I'll just have to wait and see some unsponsored logs, or buy it and try it for myself... Regardless it's smart marketing IMO, I worked in sales for 5 years, and I HATE when someone tries to sell me on something, I even will keep a telemarketer (time permitting, and if they sound like a douche) on the phone for a 1/2 hr or so and have him think he has a HUGE sale/commission coming his way and at the end I critique the salesperson on what they did wrong, they get confused, and I tell them I am just messing with em (nice way of putting it), they are usually in shock and stumble on words, and if you just start laughing, I GARUNTEE they will never bother you again. It's my way of giving karma back to a field that has shafted time and time again. That being said, I will probably pick up some of this, just like I did with epicatechin, before it has had a lot of user feedback, basically taking these companies/products on their word... I hope this product is solid, and more solid products keep coming out. It makes supplementation fun and it a lot of ways educational for me, we as humans progress with technology and just about everything really, I wouldn't be surprised if there are leaps in supplementation over the next few years. I know there are A lot more products and companies out there to chose from, which fuels innovation, so yeah, that's my .02 (sorry if I got a bit off topic)
thelast10
Member
It is very sad but very true that people think T=instant muscles... I have known people who don't workout anymore start a cycle, god knows why? I have even had a few people ask me about PH's/DS/(juice in general), yet they had never even worked out more than maybe once or twice and that was back when they were in high school gym class lol. It's these type of people I described that I could tell them to make sure to stock up on Bull Testicle and Gorilla piss extracts for PCT and they wouldn't doubt it lol....
Jiigzz
Legend
16lbs of LBM is. Esp. For advanced athletes.
The training and macro breakdown would mimic the study
Jiigzz
Legend
Absolutely.
Training a muscle group once per week is definitely not training anywhere near the body's potential.
The study design is well done; only time will tell how the average user benefits from HMB-FA.
Interesting nonetheless.
kissdadookie
Well-known member
Exactly.
fightnews
Well-known member
so the first 8 weeks you only train 3 days a week? no16 lbs in 3months obv wouldn't (well 16lbs of LBM in 3 months isn't slow, I could put on 30-40+lbs in 3 months if I wanted too, but it certainly wouldn't be clean) Here is the Mandatory training regimen they want the loggers doing throughout the 12 week cycle Invalid Link Removed , I forgot the exact macro breakdown they want you to do as well. I guess they have their reasons behind this training and the macro breakdown they want you to eat, but I would like to see how it works for people on the training/eating they had been doing and see the benefits from that... Guess I'll just have to wait and see some unsponsored logs, or buy it and try it for myself... Regardless it's smart marketing IMO, I worked in sales for 5 years, and I HATE when someone tries to sell me on something, I even will keep a telemarketer (time permitting, and if they sound like a douche) on the phone for a 1/2 hr or so and have him think he has a HUGE sale/commission coming his way and at the end I critique the salesperson on what they did wrong, they get confused, and I tell them I am just messing with em (nice way of putting it), they are usually in shock and stumble on words, and if you just start laughing, I GARUNTEE they will never bother you again. It's my way of giving karma back to a field that has shafted time and time again. That being said, I will probably pick up some of this, just like I did with epicatechin, before it has had a lot of user feedback, basically taking these companies/products on their word... I hope this product is solid, and more solid products keep coming out. It makes supplementation fun and it a lot of ways educational for me, we as humans progress with technology and just about everything really, I wouldn't be surprised if there are leaps in supplementation over the next few years. I know there are A lot more products and companies out there to chose from, which fuels innovation, so yeah, that's my .02 (sorry if I got a bit off topic)
kissdadookie
Well-known member
But look at the training there. If you actually follow it, it's not a brisk walk in the park, lol.
fightnews
Well-known member
I understand bro, But you seem like you refuse to believe anything but this product being the best supplement ever? You're on a few boards responding to hmbfa threads with the fury of a guy who invented the supplement. Whats your angle brah?
De__eB
Well-known member
They were doing ~70,000lb loads per workout, full body, 3x/week.
kissdadookie
Well-known member
I'm not saying that the product is going to give those results to most people. I have been defending the actual study and the MOA of the HMB. Look at the argument people have been making to slam the study, it amounts to "I don't believe it." What is there to believe or not to believe? The data is the data and those involved have been very forthright about the details of the data.
Like I said on another board, if your training/lifestyle/diet is not there to take advantage of whatever benefit a supplement provides and you are unwilling to adjust those variables to take advantage of something, that has nothing to do with the supplement working or not, that's you thinking that a supplement is a magic bullet.
fightnews
Well-known member
Well studies aren't infallible and its ok to be skeptical people dont have to believe everything, Especially with a claim like this. When the product actually comes out it will have its chance to shine or not.
ericool007
Active member
The less you expect from something the more ull be pleasantly surprised. Anyways when's the release date for clear muscle.
kissdadookie
Well-known member
Nothing to do with skepticism or not. It has to do with very lazy people just bashing something that they didn't have any idea of. All a person needed to do was look through the study and see what was done. Most of them however just looked at the abstract and the conclusion and then wrote it off as "Nope, impossible. I don't believe it. Must be a conspiracy created by the Metabolic Inc. The researchers must be on the take. MuscleTech is trying to lie to us!" I mean, it doesn't even have anything to do with MuscleTech in the first place. They didn't fund the study. They don't have any relations Metabolic Inc. All MuscleTech did was be smart enough to see this as an opportunity to get exclusive rights to the ingredient just like Biotest was smart enough to jump on PA.
Plus, WHAT CLAIMS ARE BEING MADE? All that is being done is that MT pointed out the findings of the study (and why wouldn't you want to quote the study especially when you'e the company that bought the exclusive rights to the ingredients because the study was so good to begin with). All anybody needs to do is to go read the full study and heck, watch Wilson's video presentation. Then look at past HMB studies to see if things fall in line.
On top of all this, HMB is not going to do much shining at all if the majority of people assume that it's some sort of strong anabolic. It's been shown over and over again in HMB studies that HMB is conditionally beneficial, if you don't position yourself to be in a condition in which HMB becomes an important variable, it's not going to do much for you. If you are allowed to improve recovery relatively acutely but you don't push harder on your training, you honestly think this stuff is going to do anything? On the other board, there was a thread on ArA where the person was saying that ArA didn't do anything for him and he also stated that he was unwilling to tweak his training for a supplement, so is that because the ArA didn't work or is that because the person didn't monetize on what the ArA provided?
None of these supplements are really going to do the work for you, they allow you to progress further and increase the work, but at the end of the day, you're still going to have to put in the work.
MultiVitamin
Active member
Just yes
kissdadookie
Well-known member
Go read the actual study. That Ergo Log post was a bit silly because it boils down to them not believing the results without any actual reasoning behind why they don't believe it. Ergo Log is basically insinuating that the study was fabricated. Look at the scientists that conducted the study, Dr. Wilson is one of main ones and has done much work on HMB already and he's not bankrolled by Metabolic. You honestly think that some of the most respected researchers in the field of strength athletes is going to risk his career here?
Also, look at what Ergo Log stated, they stated that they couldn't believe the results and then reference just the results for the HMB-FA group. Most people would actually say that it's impossible for the placebo group to gain what they gained naturally, so how is the placebo group result plausible and the HMB-FA result not?
End of the day, what hype and what results are you waiting for? The study is the study and the data is the data. The results are in the data for the study.
ODoyle99
Member
^My thoughts too. MuscleTech is starting a logging promo on another board but they're making it mandatory to follow the study's training protocol and to adhere to the study's nutrition protocol as closely as you can. I wanted to see the effects for people's normal workouts, maybe kicked up a notch or two but not the study's training protocol! Feel like that's a cheap way to ensure the loggers aren't apathetic about the product
kissdadookie
Well-known member
So basically you're looking for a magic bullet. Please do not use supplements, they are not magic bullets.
fightnews
Well-known member
From Ergo-logWe're going to be honest here: we just can't believe these results. Experienced strength athletes simply can't gain 7 kg lean meat in three months by training and taking a supplement. And then losing 5 kg fat at the same time? That's not even possible if you take steroids. So how would taking a supplement make it possible?Maybe you should stop acting like you are above everybody and/or be a little more skeptical yourself?
fightnews
Well-known member
No they gave their reasoning you just choose to ignore it then make comparisons that have nothing to do with their point.
fightnews
Well-known member
Just try to get in on it and do your own workout, how are they going to know? I'd rather just pay the 50 bucks anyway then have to do it the way they say. **** them anyway they just want people to use that program so they make gains from doing something new then attribute it to the product.
fightnews
Well-known member
LMFAO where did you get that from? you are putting words in his mouth. Stop acting like you have some higher understanding then everyone else. You do NOT. We all train hard, work hard eat well and have experience with supplements. Some of us over 25 years. You're just in your own little bubble where you think you are superior to everyone but you are not. I'm not even reading your posts anymore. Does this site have an ignore feature?
kissdadookie
Well-known member
fightnews, enough is enough. You wish to get your information from a blog post rather than look through the actual study, that's your issue. The problem I have with posts like yours and the other poster I replied to is that none of you bothered to look at the study and apply critical thinking. You already went into it with a bias that there's some sort of marketing scheme behind it thus the ingredient has not proven itself. The data is there, it's published, it's incredibly detailed and thorough. If you're not going to go by the data and instead just assume this is all some sort of skewed marketing nonsense, no way anybody will be able to change your view on the subject.
The data is the data. It already shows the results. Anybody who looks at the study in depth will immediately know what it took to get the results of the study and they will know what the difference is between the same training protocol with and without HMB-FA. If you do not wish to take advantage of an ingredient, that's your own issue but to insinuate that the data was somehow falsified? Seriously, that's hilarious.
The data is the data. It already shows the results. Anybody who looks at the study in depth will immediately know what it took to get the results of the study and they will know what the difference is between the same training protocol with and without HMB-FA. If you do not wish to take advantage of an ingredient, that's your own issue but to insinuate that the data was somehow falsified? Seriously, that's hilarious.
ODoyle99
Member
No, I'm not looking for a magic bullet. All I as saying was I want to see people's normal workouts while on it--maybe with them increasing the volume to a point they feel they can.
If it can just add 2 extra pounds (12.5% of claims) with people's normal workouts then it'd be an awesome natural product. Having them trying to recreate as much of the study as they can takes the value out of the logs for me. If I get it I won't be running that training protocol.
^Was the only point I made...
kissdadookie
Well-known member
This will depend on how much more work you add in. HMB in general has a strong anti-catabolic action that creates a better protein breakdown to protein synthesis balance. On a cut I can see it being very effective due to what HMB does, on maintenance or bulk, I think that you're really going to have to push that throttle pretty hard because what you are going to have is much improved recovery (thus allowing for increased workload, it's like having a bigger gas tank but you will still have to fill it with gas, if that analogy sucks, I apologize, it's what popped into my head).
Quadzilla99
Member
kissdadookie likes this stuff I think
kissdadookie
Well-known member
I like reading the interesting promising data. I just find it silly for people to say things like "I want to see the results" when the results are in the actual study.
kissdadookie
Well-known member
Two studies years apart is what we have for HMB's effects on strength training, as the HMB-FA was trying to replicated an older HMB-Ca study (but the older study was for 8 weeks IIRC and not as intense, so this study actually goes even further). There's also 80+ HMB studies out. Many people point to the studies that did not show HMB doing much but those studies were not very well designed, the well designed studies also happened to be the studies that used blood draws to assure compliance (the studies that showed the HMB doing nothing did not have much control over variables).
So the point here is that the actions of HMB isn't really new and a lot of what they found in the HMB-Fa study demonstrates what previous studies have shown. The only major difference here is that we now know 1) concentration of HMB in circulating serum matters and 2) we now know even better how strength trainees can utilize it optimally. So going by the data available, and there's much of it, how does one even become skeptical of the results? If you look at the data available, the only question is if one is if one wishes to use HMB in an optimal fashion or not. If not, don't use the stuff. Even ArA is not going to give you much if any results if you don't provide an adequate stimuli to take advantage of the increased ArA stores in your system.
End of the day, I'm really not trying to defend MT or the HMB, but it is just completely bizarre to me that people are ignoring the data and then just insinuating that it's bunk or that it's something that needs to be proven. The study is the proof of what can be achieved with HMB, real proper training, and a well managed and controlled diet vs. without HMB. I mean, instead of analyzing the available data, people are just reading blog posts that are cherry picking pieces of the data out of context and then insinuating that the data may have been fabricated.
JoeRecomp
New member
I'm a firm believer that one can make use of almost any supplement if training and diet are in order (notice I put training before diet, JMHO). So I'm certainly gonna give it a go, might even hit a muscle group multiple times a day every other day... we'll see. Nonetheless you've made your point.
USPlabsRep
Board Sponsor
the bold will make you wiser and sometimes we should take our own advice.
kissdadookie
Well-known member
I am taking my own advice. Did you not look through the study and some of the previous studies? The results really are not out of the norm especially considering what was seen in previous HUMAN studies and seeing what happened with the placebo group. There's 80+ HMB studies available.Go look earlier in this thread, I was on the bandwagon of taking swipes at MT, until the data came out and I looked through it.Perhaps you should follow your own advice and perhaps take more interest in well designed and well executed human studies rather than extrapolating data for new ingredients from shaky rodent studies? I mean, what exactly did aegeline do again?
- Status