I realise that and I'm not trying to troll. Apologies if it seems that way. I know major gains and vector are not the same it just seemed like the solution was implying that this is how you test all supplements but I feel the in some cases calories need to be adjusted depending on the goal. I also understand that even when bulking due to the increase in calories it becomes difficult to assertain what improvements are down to the sup and what is purely down to the food.
This is what I said in my first post, and then you tried to tell me I was wrong. So you just pot kettle blacked yourself.
Not at all brother.. I agree that all supplements cannot be taken or treated the same way and expect results. You definitely will have to adjust calories. Just talking about major gains, Solution has the right approach. However, I feel someone with experience on a few bulking and cutting/recomp cycles should be able to gauge if the supplement has attributed a their accelerated Weight gain, muscle mass, strength etc...
ive been monitoring my nutrition and have an IFBB Pro who monitors my nutrition for over a decade. Trust me I know nutrition and I am always on point besides the cheat meal I get every week. If a company wants honest feedback then you change NOTHING But the supplement. This way you know exactly what it does and how it treats you.
Anyone can jack up their intake, and see the scale move and the mirror fill out. Of course nutrition does that. but then you have 0 Clue how much Major Gains played in the feedback you are giving to a company. Which is a far stretch to the truth.
If you are going to adjust a variable (nutrition) the final outcome is skewed period.
Go read any study on a product or with nutrition. They are not adjusting their intake. If they do then its impossible to know how X and Y would be treated over a 4-8-12 week period when you adjust a variable.
if you want to test something you don't stack it, you dont adjust your nutrition, cardio, or other training protocols. Doing so gives a company distorted feedback when you change other factors that can influence what the product claims.
Let us go back to post #1 here
Claim #1:
Phosphatidic Acid which was able to help produce 5.3 lbs of muscle gains on just 3 days of training in studies with up to a 600% increase in mTOR signaling.
BloodManor did not see this either, neither did Oconns28
Maral Extract which as able to increase working capacity by up to 15% after just 20 days of use. Ursolic Acid which boasted 413% more muscle gains and 5 lbs of fat loss in a 4-week university study.
If this was the case my big 3 would be almost 2000 at 170 pounds. Yeah I am not there either. I am over 2 weeks and I did not lose 2.5 pounds of fat which is half the claim.
now if the product lists it can do this
Key Benefits of Major Gains:
•Helps Increase Lean Muscle Mass*
•Helps Increase mTOR Signaling*
•Helps Accelerate Muscle Recovery*
•Helps Reduce Mental & Physical Fatigue*
•Helps Increase Muscular Strength*
•Helps Improve Protein Synthesis*
•Helps Reduce Body Fat*
•Helps Prevent Catabolic Muscle Wasting*
•Helps Increase ATP Restoration Within Cells*
•Helps Improve Mood*
•Helps Improve Mental Focus*
•Helps Increase Nitrogen Retention*
•No On Cycle Or PCT Required*
All of these variables should be noted with NO CHANGES but adding the supplement
again another reason why you can't trust someone who constantly stacks or skews their nutrition. If you want to see how much a product meets its label claims you run the log as it. That is the best and most effective way to give honest feedback to a company and what it claims will happen.