Post: #1

Its hard to find a decent image of how muscular and lean you can get without the use of any drugs. Often these fitness models use 1 gram of steroids from what I understand and fat burners. I feel that models the ones that claim to be natural, set unrealistic expectations in the gym. But they do sell product much easier to gullible guys like myself in the past.

I believe all of these guys are on something.



http://nattyornot.com/top-10-fake-natura...s-youtube/

Post: #2

(10-23-2014 09:09 PM)kbell Wrote:  Its hard to find a decent image of how muscular and lean you can get without the use of any drugs. Often these fitness models use 1 gram of steroids from what I understand and fat burners. I feel that models the ones that claim to be natural, set unrealistic expectations in the gym. But they do sell product much easier to gullible gym rats.

I believe all of these guys are on something.

http://www.alldaybodybuilding.com/2014/0...ation.html

Not expert on steroid use, but I guess it's always hard to tell the .01 of genetically gifted from users.
Here's a page with photos from 1940s and 1950s, I'm guessing that was before the availability of commercial steroids?

http://www.weightrainer.net/training/ima...eroid.html

The first one is notable for the smoothness and lack of striation, that seems to be one of the markers of artificiality.

To me these guys seems more aesthetically appealing than guys with striations, who sort of look inhuman to me.

EDIT: Ok I found some photos I think is pre-steroid; "strong men" from 1890s are at bottom of page -- higher up is steve reeves who probably (?) was juicing

http://fitmisc.com/forum/showthread.php/...ique-natty

But then again, he might have been eating goat testicles regularly like I do.

Subjectively, muscles that appear "puffy"-- as if inflated-- as well as striations, seem to point to juicing.

Post: #3

http://www.steroidology.com/history-of-a...-steroids/

They looks a bit bigger than I would expect too although its seems more earthly than say the ones I posted. Steroids have been around since the 1930s.

Post: #4

Eugene Sandow had impressive body. Like a Greek statue.





I probably drew this sculpture in college.

However the problem is this from more than 100 years ago. Is this look common at all now?

Post: #5

Look at old strongmen from 1800's and early 1900's
Theres guys had very impressive strength and physiques, and couldn't have been on steroids.
Saxon, Sandow, etc.
You don't need steroids to have a strong impressive physique.
Its not like it would matter for picking up women either.
99% of girls don't want a freak of nature with veins and bulging muscles everywhere, like that kali muscle guy.
For me, the ideal physique would be fast, strong, lean but still muscular.
Im thinking along the lines of someone like GSP in MMA. Not knocking the huge bodybuilder look, thats just me.
I don't care if people roid, but I do care if they are telling everyone they are natural when its completely obvious they aint.
Just own up to it, then cool.
I don't think the hodge twins are on roods to be honest. They have been training and dieting forever.
The human body is capable of many things

Post: #6

   


Seriously trough what you consider natural? And if those animals are fed with growth hormones?

Is cooking and eating meat natural?

Is pasteurized milk natural?

Is training natural? No animal does that.

Is driving car so you don't have to walk for 4 hours every day that would eat some of your muscle mass natural?

Is using antibiotics so you don't have to fast to heal your cold natural?

Is protein powder natural?



I think everyone should draw the line for himself based on lifestyle needs.

Post: #7

Some guys can grow massive without steroids etc.

Even the strictly vegan bodybuilders are pretty big:



With current guys you have to take into account that by eating meat or even milk-products, you are also ingesting plenty of substances, which make you bulk up "naturally". The very same person eating a US 1970s diet would never get it. That is also a reason why so many US raised Americans are so massive compared to their EU counterparts. Sadly the same goes for some girls, since not working out with food like that makes you gain fat and mass faster.

On the other hand there were certainly guys even in ancient times who were more massive even naturally. Schwarzenegger for example is estimated to be among less than 1% of people physically - most guys would not be able to achieve his results even with the same added help and workout level.

I somehow doubt that all the paintings & sculptures of the past were based on some fantasy - there must have been some strong men & soldiers who reached that kind of mass naturally:

Post: #8

Someone already beat me to it, like the Farnese hercules.

Post: #9

You guys pretty much all of the solid points nailed. I think that to some extent, this is an impossible question to answer. This is something I've been thinking about for about a year though, so here's a few thoughts.

What can be considered realistic is definitely any physique that was made before testosterone was isolated in 1935.

What you must consider when you look at these old physiques (Sandow, Saxon, Goerner), however, is that it also predates the popularization of the squat and the invention of the bench press. Those are two very big lifts for hypertrophy and definitely can make large changes to any physique.

None of those old timers had big hanging tits and a casual observer will assume that a big chest is impossible to build without steroids. None of these old timers had enormous quad hypertrophy either, and in a day and age before the back squat, that could very well be the only reason why this is the case. We can only wonder would could have been, had the squat and bench been around.

These men were married to their pet lifts, and have all set very competitive records therein. Goerner's deadlift record at nearly 800 pounds stood for something like sixty years undefeated.

Nobody will ever touch Arthur Saxon's bent press record. He blew that fucker so far out of the water and ahead of the competition that men within the business of strength just sat about and marveled. He put nearly 400 pounds overhead with one hand (370 official, 385 unofficial) in the bent press. So to say you can't get strong without steroids is untrue, you just have to be married to your craft.

If you're operating from a standpoint of "everybody who looks better than me is on steroids" like that guy on Natty or Not then even a few cases of remarkably swole motherfuckers who couldn't have possibly been using steroids are going to be dismissed as genetic freaks. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Saxon and Goerner would fail his self-administered "Natty or Not" speculation fueled slanderous fucking drug test. These are serious accusations to level at anybody, pro athletes more so than physique competitors and personal trainers, but still.

The problem when trying to find anybody who is self proclaimed natty in the modern age is that if you've heard of them, they must be remarkable (in the top 1-2%), they must be competitive (if you don't win, nobody gives a shit), they are probably making a living from their physique (shit takes time and effort, like a full time job) and if they have a total competitive mindset and have the brains to figure shit out (not every "meathead" is an idiot), they've almost assuredly come up with a strategic plan for when, how, and to what extent they can dose themselves up with steroids and can avoid failing the drug test.

I'm sure on the cutting edge of that shit there are drugs and ways to mask drugs that won't be detectable through testing for at least a decade, because the drug makers always have more money than the drug testing committee and have a bigger incentive to deliver their 'all-natty' physique monsters an effective product that will enable their collective lies. Pandora's box is wide open.

Post: #10

(10-24-2014 07:38 AM)Hades Wrote:  ...
I'm sure on the cutting edge of that shit there are drugs and ways to mask drugs that won't be detectable through testing for at least a decade, because the drug makers always have more money than the drug testing committee and have a bigger incentive to deliver their 'all-natty' physique monsters an effective product that will enable their collective lies. Pandora's box is wide open.

Hermann Goerner in his youth looks pretty much like many big guys now. In addition his body was likely additionally toned for strength & endurance which adds a lot more power if you were up against such a guy for example while arm wrestling. Occasionally I saw strange things in the gym like a relatively thin guy lifting or using twice the amount of weight than some massive one.

Post: #11

This guy nicknamed Samson was phtographed on the island of Diego Garcia in 1968 when the american military arrived there, pretty impressive physique for no weights.

"One of the island workers known to us as "Samson" was built like Arnold Swartzenegger (sp). Each worker had a weekly quota of coconuts to gather and husk. Sampson could do his quota in three days and take the rest of the week off. It was amazing to see him work, . After a few years on the island, Sampson was offered his free trip back to the Seychelles. He stayed in the Seychelles for one ship and returned to Diego and said he would be happy to spend the rest of his life on Diego."

http://www.zianet.com/tedmorris/dg/1968.html

Post: #12

I'm at work or I'd post a selfie for you guys

Post: #13

http://www.leangains.com/2010/12/maximum...ntial.html

The opinion of the leangains-dude Martin Berkhan, inventor of the modern Intermittent Fasting. My own experience is the same, once you get to the weight of Height in centimeters-100 (in kilograms) in a lean condition, be it contest ready as in the article or 8-10%, gains are really slow and your physique won't change too much. Obviously it depends on your frame, height and weight, muscle insertions and so on, a normal person can put on roughly 20-30 pounds of lean muscle in their bodybuilding career. A usual male 5'10-6'3 ends up around 180-200 pounds in contest shape. There are very few outliers. The thing is, people carry their weight differently and someone with a good starting point (wide clavicles, long muscle bellies, small waist) can look truly impressive even as a natty while someone with a worse starting point won't (which still means you're a beast compared to the average dude).

The other thing is, pictures are always taken with a pump and great lighting. Bodybuilding is about creating an illusion of a bigger size. Better angles, tanning, shaving, water and salt manipulation - all that stuff makes the muscles and veins pop out better. There's no point in comparing yourself to these pictures, the guys don't look like that 24/7.

Post: #14

To me natural is simply not using added hormones and drugs orally or injected. I doubt your going to get a huge amount of growth hormones and antibiotics from meats and dairy you eat. Also if you moved to say a place where everything is grassfed and antibiotic free, I doubt your going to lose 40 lbs of muscle either.

Also what do the guys look like 24/7? From that link the 8 week out looked super impressive. Much more than I would want to be, since I don't really want to compete. But I do think knowing the limits is important. It does make me feel better about my progress.

Post: #15

I've always felt like the "he's definitely juicing" shit gets thrown around a bit too liberally.

Beyond All Seas

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.
To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes
frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Kipling

Post: #16

(10-24-2014 10:58 AM)Beyond Borders Wrote:  I've always felt like the "he's definitely juicing" shit gets thrown around a bit too liberally.

No, I think it gets thrown around too little.

A lot of guys do juice and don't say it because there is no benefit to doing so.

I also disagree wit you Hades that the bench is a mass builder, it isn't, unless you roid.

The overhead press, which the pre-steroid lifters used, is far superior overall massbuilder due to not being an isolation exercise. The big 3d chest is a hallmark of juicing along with a 3d delts. It is no co-incidence that natural lifters always get called out on their 'weak' chest. The natural chest musculature doesn't bulge outward like we're been accustomed to seeing. The old timers also used clean and press with kettlebells which is an excellent mass building exercise. The squat is not the be all end all of leg development. I've seen 17 year old oly lifters weighing 65kg easily outsquat huge bodybuilders without hardly ever training the back squat, but doing all kinds of cleans.

Generally, it is always impossible to find natural lifters to inspire in mainstream bodybuilding culture. Consider for example Zyzz who apparently is a semi-god to many young bb'ers. He juiced and didn't hide it, yet his physique is considered ideal and as a goal for the newbie lifter. Most lifters have no idea what natural limits really are, because everyone lies about it.

Yes, I realize the above comes off as salty, but it's the truth, roiding completely distorts the image of natural lifting.

Post: #17

It seems the internet would have you believe anything beyond Brad Pitts physique in fight club is unattainable without juicing. Literally everyone with a good/great physique is accused of juicing. I don't know that I can buy into beliefs that are 95% speculation, some of these guys have to have the right mindset of patience and hard work and not using gear.

Where I want to end up strength and physique wise is similar to Corey Hall http://youtu.be/r2OGpM6HBro I have to believe that's doable without steroids.

Post: #18

Honestly who gives a $hit if someone is natty or not.

Even if you use juice, you still need the dedication to eat right and lift properly which most of the population can't even do.

So what if it's "cheating". Wall Street and many major corporations have been doing that for years and they do not give a damn. A little testosterone administered in a controlled environment will do wonders for many men, body builders or not.

The pre-steroid physiques are really impressive, although I'd wager that these guys are genetically gifted. Especially since like another poster mentioned the bench press and squat moves weren't even on their radars.

To me gear is like another set of supplements or a new exercise at the gym, another tool in my box to define the physique I want.

Post: #19

(10-24-2014 12:20 PM)aeroektar Wrote:  Where I want to end up strength and physique wise is similar to Corey Hall http://youtu.be/r2OGpM6HBro I have to believe that's doable without steroids.

Yes, that is natty and 'easily' attainable with a couple of years training, less if you're genetically gifted.

Post: #20

(10-24-2014 12:42 PM)frenchie Wrote:  Honestly who gives a $hit if someone is natty or not.

Even if you use juice, you still need the dedication to eat right and lift properly which most of the population can't even do.
..

Exactly - hormone replacement therapy can be done in a very healthy way - of course what the current top Bodybuilders are doing cannot be healthy, but they know it too.

Here an example of an MD who is offering custom-made hormone replacement therapy - using it himself obviously:


http://www.lef.org/magazine/2011/7/a-str...ge/page-01

He is in his 70s and his face could look better, but he had a terrible lifestyle up until his 50s as you can see in the pic. Personally I intend to go his route later on in life. I am going to juice as much as is healthy.

My goal is to look like a mixture between this MD and Dr.Graham (80-10-10 diet founder).


He is almost 70, but took better care of his body.

Post: #21

You usually tend to find out who is on gear when they start fucking their bodies up. They might look good but their liver, kidney and heart take a beating.

Post: #22

(10-24-2014 11:18 AM)berserk Wrote:  

(10-24-2014 10:58 AM)Beyond Borders Wrote:  I've always felt like the "he's definitely juicing" shit gets thrown around a bit too liberally.

No, I think it gets thrown around too little.

A lot of guys do juice and don't say it because there is no benefit to doing so.

I also disagree wit you Hades that the bench is a mass builder, it isn't, unless you roid.

The overhead press, which the pre-steroid lifters used, is far superior overall massbuilder due to not being an isolation exercise. The big 3d chest is a hallmark of juicing along with a 3d delts. It is no co-incidence that natural lifters always get called out on their 'weak' chest. The natural chest musculature doesn't bulge outward like we're been accustomed to seeing. The old timers also used clean and press with kettlebells which is an excellent mass building exercise. The squat is not the be all end all of leg development. I've seen 17 year old oly lifters weighing 65kg easily outsquat huge bodybuilders without hardly ever training the back squat, but doing all kinds of cleans.

Generally, it is always impossible to find natural lifters to inspire in mainstream bodybuilding culture. Consider for example Zyzz who apparently is a semi-god to many young bb'ers. He juiced and didn't hide it, yet his physique is considered ideal and as a goal for the newbie lifter. Most lifters have no idea what natural limits really are, because everyone lies about it.

Yes, I realize the above comes off as salty, but it's the truth, roiding completely distorts the image of natural lifting.

Sure, there's lots of "small" guys out there who use steroids.

My point being with the bench and the squat is that the squat rack and bench press stand weren't invented until relatively recently. If it's possible to build a huge chest and quads without steroids, we've lost our control group with the golden age of lifters. The only way you can really figure out if that is the case is to do it yourself.

Bench isn't an isolation exercise, and if you're not personally throwing around 3 plates on the bench then you can't say for sure if it is bad for building pecs, lol. The pre steroid lifters did not bench. Look at their flat chests.

Here's a guy, Marvin Eder, mostly got swole in the 40s and did eight hour sessions of weighted dips. He was a powerhouse in the oly lifting community. Nearly killed himself a few times with heavy bench lockouts. He was pretty big at 16 and huge when he retired at 22.

Read up on him, he had big hanging Arnie tits and 3d delts that any 130 pound skinny fat internet warrior would call steroids on, he says he never did them and that's still a pretty likely possibility. This was before crossfit and the internet.

(10-24-2014 07:54 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Hermann Goerner in his youth looks pretty much like many big guys now. In addition his body was likely additionally toned for strength & endurance which adds a lot more power if you were up against such a guy for example while arm wrestling. Occasionally I saw strange things in the gym like a relatively thin guy lifting or using twice the amount of weight than some massive one.

It's pretty hilarious to read up on Goerner since he was performing feats that nobody has even got within shouting distance of. He one arm deadlifted something like 700 pounds. I haven't heard of anybody in recent years get much past 400 pounds on the one armed deadlift. Definitely a phenomenon, Goerner.

Post: #23

I'll take the keyboard warrior subtle insult, but steroids were around since the late 30s and if group would have access to cutting edge "tech" it would be the oly lifters and testosterone injections were widely used during WW2 and in sports in the 40s.

Case in point, Eder could very likely have used since testosterone was widely available in the 40s. Then as now, bodybuilders are at the forefront of research in performance enhancing drugs.

Post: #24

(10-24-2014 05:18 PM)berserk Wrote:  I'll take the keyboard warrior subtle insult, but steroids were around since the late 30s and if group would have access to cutting edge "tech" it would be the oly lifters and testosterone injections were widely used during WW2 and in sports in the 40s.

Case in point, Eder could very likely have used since testosterone was widely available in the 40s. Then as now, bodybuilders are at the forefront of research in performance enhancing drugs.

I've been reading too much Natty or Not, which makes me rage. I don't think you're a 130 pound skinny fat keyboard warrior. The guy who writes that site might be, he has no pictures posted.

Your points are reasonable, but there is reasonable doubt here to stress. It is hard to see what is possible with chest development before the invention of the bench press since it coincides with steroids. Take a look at Natty or Not, if anybody in the history of man ever developed a top 1% physique without steroids, he would call steroids because he is unable to entertain a different idea in his head.

And sure, Eder could have used steroids. It's his word against everyone else's. I don't think he did. I'll give him credit for doing workouts that nobody else would consider doing even if he was doped up.

Post: #25

(10-24-2014 05:32 PM)Hades Wrote:  

(10-24-2014 05:18 PM)berserk Wrote:  I'll take the keyboard warrior subtle insult, but steroids were around since the late 30s and if group would have access to cutting edge "tech" it would be the oly lifters and testosterone injections were widely used during WW2 and in sports in the 40s.

Case in point, Eder could very likely have used since testosterone was widely available in the 40s. Then as now, bodybuilders are at the forefront of research in performance enhancing drugs.

I've been reading too much Natty or Not, which makes me rage. I don't think you're a 130 pound skinny fat keyboard warrior. The guy who writes that site might be, he has no pictures posted.

Your points are reasonable, but there is reasonable doubt here to stress. It is hard to see what is possible with chest development before the invention of the bench press since it coincides with steroids. Take a look at Natty or Not, if anybody in the history of man ever developed a top 1% physique without steroids, he would call steroids because he is unable to entertain a different idea in his head.

And sure, Eder could have used steroids. It's his word against everyone else's. I don't think he did. I'll give him credit for doing workouts that nobody else would consider doing even if he was doped up.

Sure thing, but genetics do factor into it. Eder could be natural as could be many others on that Natty or Not site. We're only seeing top 1% anyway, since no one makes it to the top of bodybuilding, juicing or not, without genetic gifts. What would be more interesting is to see the average lifter back then. Dips are an excellent pec builder, so that alone probably set him apart.

My beef with steroids is mostly that I find it stupid that guys in the west feel the need to join an arms race of juicing to compete for mediocre women, when a skinny Russian in ill fitting clothes can land a better girl without.