How long does creatine last?
Mike M.
Hi, How long does 500g of creatine last with loading phases included? I'm
trying to determine the cost per day of using creatine.
Thanks.
Todd Sauder
Let's see, 20g/day x 7 = 140g. 500-140 = 360g left. 360g/5g/day=72 days.
72 days + 7 days (loading) = 79 days. In my neck of the woods, creatine
costs $28/500g. Therefore, it costs me $28/79days= 35 cents a day.
Todd
Mike Berg
wrote:
In my neck of the woods, creatine
>costs $28/500g. >
>Todd
You're paying too much Todd.
Mike Berg
_______________________________
http://www.milleniumfitness.com
The Original Millennium Fitness
Natural Fitness and Bodybuilding Supplements Online
Recent pictures at http://www.milleniumfitness.com/personal.html
ASW Website
http://www.webdesigns1.com/asw/
Todd Sauder
Mike Berg wrote in message <3853e494...@enews.newsguy.com>...
Mike M.
Yeah, I have. But I was just unsure of how many loading phases were
included.
Mike
Todd Sauder <tsa...@home.com> wrote in message
news:MoG44.4486$P5.6...@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com...
Matt Staples
news:82v2ep$1vfo$1...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com...
Loading: 20g/day x 5 days = 100g
Maintenance: 5g/day x 80 days = 400g.
So using that scheme would allow you to use creatine for about 3 months,
which is probably how long you should stay on it anyway. Personally, I need
more for maintenance. Still, creatine is one of the most cost-effective
supplements you can use, especially when you look at it on a cost-benefit
basis.
--
Matt Staples
http://www.thegym.net/mbbfr
Matt Staples
> Canadian dollars...
So that means you're paying what in U.S. dollars for 500g .... about $3.00?
:)
>
> Mike Berg wrote in message <3853e494...@enews.newsguy.com>...
> >On Sun, 12 Dec 1999 05:29:16 GMT, "Todd Sauder" <tsa...@home.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> > In my neck of the woods, creatine
> >>costs $28/500g. >
tw...@my-deja.com
I hate the fact that I spend $50 US Phasphagain2 & use half the "jug"
just for loading.
Can anyone explain to me the benefit of loading creatine?
Tim
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Bill Andrews
<tw...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:832su0$4f5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Mike Berg
>Question from a cheap-skate ....
>I hate the fact that I spend $50 US Phasphagain2 & use half the "jug"
>just for loading.
>Can anyone explain to me the benefit of loading creatine?
>Tim
You're not a cheapskate. You load creatine to allow a "pool" from
which to use. You will see the benefits quicker by loading and in
fact, the only people I've ever dealt with who didn't see benefits
from creatine were the ones who
A: Didn't load
and, or
B: Didn't drink enough water
Next time, do some shopping online and you'll find you can easily get
a good quality creatine for about $30/1000 grams. That will last
about 4 months.
Todd Sauder
Mike Berg
wrote:
>Mike, that was $28 CANADIAN!
Gotcha.
Archon
according to a friend of mine who has a doctorate in some sort of
chemistry and follows biotech companies. I trust what he has to say
about supplements because he has nothing to gain.
IMHO the "loading phase" is a scam, like the shampoo directions that say
to wash your hair twice. They just want you to use it up and buy more.
I've used creatine without loading and have had gains that people have
mentioned, but honestly don't know if it's the creatine or just hard
work.
FYI: He also said protein supplements are useful, but said most of the
other stuff goes into the toilet.
tw...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> Question from a cheap-skate ....
>
> I hate the fact that I spend $50 US Phasphagain2 & use half the "jug"
> just for loading.
>
> Can anyone explain to me the benefit of loading creatine?
>
> Tim
>
Steve L
times is that your friend is mostly correct. The loading phase is not
"necessary" for the creatine to work but it does speed the effects so it
begins to work quicker. The high protein diet mostly from real food and
"supplemented" with protein drinks when getting the desired amount is
difficult is proven to aid in muscular gains. There are a few other supps
that also are helpful for specific purposes but many, if not most, that we
see advertised in the muscle mags are useless and wasteful. Nothing works
like a good training routine, proper nutrition and adequate rest.
--
Steve L
Slow and steady progress is better than rushing to injury.
I'm no expert so get other opinions too.
Official ASW website http://www.webdesigns1.com/asw/
*
*
Archon wrote in message <3859C154...@worldnet.att.net>...
:Creatine works without the loading phase...
BobMac
Archon wrote in message <3859C154...@worldnet.att.net>...
>
>FYI: He also said protein supplements are useful, but said most of the
>other stuff goes into the toilet.
>
>
Old quote from a European coach, looking at the supplementation regimes in
the new world: "American athletes must have the most expensive urine in the
world..."
Mike Berg
wrote:
>Creatine works without the loading phase...
>according to a friend of mine who has a doctorate in some sort of
>chemistry and follows biotech companies. I trust what he has to say
>about supplements because he has nothing to gain.
So that means what? Just because he has nothing to gain doesn't mean
he's correct.
>
>IMHO the "loading phase" is a scam, like the shampoo directions that say
>to wash your hair twice. They just want you to use it up and buy more.
>I've used creatine without loading and have had gains that people have
>mentioned, but honestly don't know if it's the creatine or just hard
>work.
It is not a scam. You might get the gains without the loading but it
takes longer. And virtually everyone I know who DIDN"T see gains from
CM are the ones who didn't load.
>FYI: He also said protein supplements are useful, but said most of the
>other stuff goes into the toilet.
Whatever.
Archon
> So that means what? Just because he has nothing to gain doesn't mean
> he's correct.
The fact that he has nothing to gain underscores his credibility. The
guy who sells umbrellas will always tell you it looks like its going to
rain.
Did you miss the line about the guy having a PhD? In addition to
spending 6 years in school -after- college, he has 19 years of work
experience. He knows more about chemical substances and how they work in
the human body than you, or I, or any personal trainer in this
newsgroup.
The truth hurts - especially those who rip-off others by selling
supplements that offer no benefit. This includes those who sell
supplement catalogs for $5 a month under the guise of motivational
magazines. They don't emphasize the fact that genetics plays a big part
in how you look. They take advantage of DYSMORPHIA - a body image
problem. That's equivalent to selling "look pretty" and vomit-inducing
pills to girls with anorexia and bulemia.
Everything you need to know could fit in one good-sized magazine or
book. But then how would the publishers and charlatans make a fortune
-every month- off of earnest but ill-informed athletes. The formula for
fitness is:
Basic Knowledge (technique & nutrition) + Hard Work + Consistency
Protein and creatine help but there are no shortcuts and no magic
potions. I know builders who have enviable musculatures who don't use
either. Most other supplements are a waste of money. Don't be gullible -
find a real authority before you spend your money.
I don't understand why you are so hostile about this. Do you sell
supplements?
Matt Bickford
length of time. Steroids have been tested and are known to be safe when used
correctly .. these friggin pro-hormones aren't even regulated .. they can
put whatever the hell they want to in them and claim that they do pretty
much anything .. Although I believe some may offer some benefit , I don;t
think it's substantila. In other words you will not build an arnoldesque
physique by taking creatine.
Matt
Archon <arc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:385C1340...@worldnet.att.net...
Clint Bateman
either unless you have good genetics to begin with.
Matt Bickford <Ma...@saturnpestcontrol.spam.com> wrote in message
news:ADU64.17$Xe....@wdc-read-01.qwest.net...
Matt Bickford
everyone will look like arnold or even the average IFBB pro .. almost all
men can attain an outstanding physique. I'd guess [40% Nutrition] [30%
Training] [25% Pharmaceuticals] and [5% genetics]
Matt
Clint Bateman <cli...@pdq.net> wrote in message
news:m_U64.10663$Ke.5...@tw11.nn.bcandid.com...
Sandman
> I think the genetic thing is given too much weight.
i disagree. its at least 50%. no matter how hard i work, no matter what i
do i can never make my bone structure any larger. no matter how good i make
myself look, i could never win if standing beside someone with the same
build, who just happens to stand 6'4".
[25% Pharmaceuticals]
no way. _maybe_ 10%. _maybe_.
--
Sandman ICQ# 1777774
Collier Welding d.b.a. Advanced Fabrication
http://www.webdesigns1.com/asw/bios/nathan.html
--> lift for health, lift for life, lift for hotter chicks. :-)
Mike Berg
wrote:
>Mike Berg wrote:
>> So that means what? Just because he has nothing to gain doesn't mean
>> he's correct.
>
>The fact that he has nothing to gain underscores his credibility
It has no bearing on whether or not he's correct though. Zero.
. The
>guy who sells umbrellas will always tell you it looks like its going to
>rain.
Yeah true but any idiot can do some research on what the weather will
be like and not just listen to some guy who doesn't sell umbrellas. To
use your metaphor.
>
>Did you miss the line about the guy having a PhD? In addition to
>spending 6 years in school -after- college, he has 19 years of work
>experience. He knows more about chemical substances and how they work in
>the human body than you, or I, or any personal trainer in this
>newsgroup.
You need to get a grip. You think that just because someone has a PhD
in a particular field means he automatically knows everything about
everything? What naivete. And to be honest, you have NO clue what I
or anyone else in this group knows about chemical substances and how
they work on the human body.
>
>I don't understand why you are so hostile about this. Do you sell
>supplements?
I'm not hostile. And if you could read my sigfile you'd realize that
yes, I do sell supplements.
Further, if you'd bothtered to actually read my reply you'd see that I
didn't say it was mandatory to load.
If you also happened to hang out here for a while, listen, and learn
something from people who actually DO train rather than come in here,
repeat by rote something that someone told you, you'd also know that I
am AT THE FOREFRONT of telling people that half the shit being sold is
useless. Don't pigenhole me to fit into some preconceived notion you
might have about me because you'd be wrong.
Steve L
Archon wrote in message <385C1340...@worldnet.att.net>...
:Mike Berg wrote:
:> So that means what? Just because he has nothing to gain doesn't mean
:> he's correct.
:
:guy who sells umbrellas will always tell you it looks like its going to
:rain.
I don't think anyone questioned his credibility. Not saying your friend is
wrong mind you (and Mike didn't either) but credibility is certainly no
assurnace of being correct.
No, not all umbrella salesmen will always tell you it looks like rain, only
the unscrupulous ones who place the importance of selling umbrellas above
their personal ethics.
:
:Did you miss the line about the guy having a PhD? In addition to
:spending 6 years in school -after- college, he has 19 years of work
:experience. He knows more about chemical substances and how they work :in
the human body than you, or I, or any personal trainer in this
:newsgroup.
That's a pretty broad statement since you really have no idea what education
or experience anyone here has but I can see how you could assume that.
:The truth hurts - especially those who rip-off others by selling
:supplements that offer no benefit. This includes those who sell
:supplement catalogs for $5 a month under the guise of motivational
:magazines. They don't emphasize the fact that genetics plays a big part
:in how you look. They take advantage of DYSMORPHIA - a body image
:problem. That's equivalent to selling "look pretty" and vomit-inducing
:pills to girls with anorexia and bulemia.
Absolutely correct. The truth that is found here in this NG nearly everyday
does hurt the muscle mags and supp manufacturers, even though it is a very
small pebble in a large pond. Honest retailers like Mike, Ed and some others
in addition to other very educated (we have doctors here too) and/or
experienced lifters and trainers here often point out to newcomers that most
supps are a waste of time and money. But you wouldn't know this if you just
found us. Of course many newcomers would rather believe there is a magic
pill or potion that will do the work for them but that is another thread.
:Everything you need to know could fit in one good-sized magazine or
:book. But then how would the publishers and charlatans make a fortune
:-every month- off of earnest but ill-informed athletes. The formula for
:fitness is:
:
:Basic Knowledge (technique & nutrition) + Hard Work + Consistency
:
:Protein and creatine help but there are no shortcuts and no magic
:potions. I know builders who have enviable musculatures who don't use
:either. Most other supplements are a waste of money. Don't be gullible -
:find a real authority before you spend your money.
Sound advice. Welcome to our little group.
:
:I don't understand why you are so hostile about this. Do you sell
:supplements?
:
I didn't hear anyone else being hostile. Somehow I think you already knew
the answer to this and apparently assumed all retailers are crooks. Being
wary of retailers is a healthy attitude I think but totally misplaced in
this instance. A deja search of all Mike's posts in this newsgroup will
verify that.
Gregory Whalin
Greg
--
Gregory Whalin
gwh...@numerix.com
Matt Bickford <Ma...@saturnpestcontrol.spam.com> wrote in message
news:ADU64.17$Xe....@wdc-read-01.qwest.net...
> I'd do anabolic injectables before I'd do those stupid pro-hormones for
any
> length of time. Steroids have been tested and are known to be safe when
used
> correctly .. these friggin pro-hormones aren't even regulated .. they can
> put whatever the hell they want to in them and claim that they do pretty
> much anything .. Although I believe some may offer some benefit , I don;t
> think it's substantila. In other words you will not build an arnoldesque
> physique by taking creatine.
>
> Matt
>
> Archon <arc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:385C1340...@worldnet.att.net...
> > Mike Berg wrote:
> > > So that means what? Just because he has nothing to gain doesn't mean
> > > he's correct.
> >
> > The fact that he has nothing to gain underscores his credibility. The
> > guy who sells umbrellas will always tell you it looks like its going to
> > rain.
> >
> > Did you miss the line about the guy having a PhD? In addition to
> > spending 6 years in school -after- college, he has 19 years of work
> > experience. He knows more about chemical substances and how they work in
> > the human body than you, or I, or any personal trainer in this
> > newsgroup.
> >
> > The truth hurts - especially those who rip-off others by selling
> > supplements that offer no benefit. This includes those who sell
> > supplement catalogs for $5 a month under the guise of motivational
> > magazines. They don't emphasize the fact that genetics plays a big part
> > in how you look. They take advantage of DYSMORPHIA - a body image
> > problem. That's equivalent to selling "look pretty" and vomit-inducing
> > pills to girls with anorexia and bulemia.
> >
> > Everything you need to know could fit in one good-sized magazine or
> > book. But then how would the publishers and charlatans make a fortune
> > -every month- off of earnest but ill-informed athletes. The formula for
> > fitness is:
> >
> > Basic Knowledge (technique & nutrition) + Hard Work + Consistency
> >
> > Protein and creatine help but there are no shortcuts and no magic
> > potions. I know builders who have enviable musculatures who don't use
> > either. Most other supplements are a waste of money. Don't be gullible -
> > find a real authority before you spend your money.
> >
> > I don't understand why you are so hostile about this. Do you sell
> > supplements?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Mike Berg wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:51:32 -0600, Archon <arc...@worldnet.att.net>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >Creatine works without the loading phase...
> > > >according to a friend of mine who has a doctorate in some sort of
> > > >chemistry and follows biotech companies. I trust what he has to say
> > > >about supplements because he has nothing to gain.
> > >
> > > So that means what? Just because he has nothing to gain doesn't mean
> > > he's correct.
> > > >
Matt Bickford
an MD friend of mine.
Matt
Gregory Whalin <gwh...@numerix.com> wrote in message
news:Td774.12402$Ke.6...@tw11.nn.bcandid.com...
GymRat
<Ma...@saturnpestcontrol.spam.com> wrote:
>Who said anything about black market? If I did them , I'd likely get em from
>an MD friend of mine.
>
>Matt
If you live in the United States your MD friend would not be able to
prescribe them for you. They are a controlled substance. Unless of
course he gets them thru the black market.
http://www.willinet.net/~broeg/index.html
GymRat
<Ma...@saturnpestcontrol.spam.com> wrote:
>Who said anything about black market? If I did them , I'd likely get em from
>an MD friend of mine.
>
>Matt
>
This is one area where I agree with Tim Fogerty. He once argued that
an MD prescribing steroids for someone for bodybuilding purposes is no
different than an MD performing plastic surgery. Both are medical
procedures, carrying certian risks of side effects, to improve one's
looks.
http://www.willinet.net/~broeg/index.html
Archon
honestly did not read your signature info and did not intend to state
that *all* supplement retailers were unscrupulous.
Steve L wrote:
> I don't think anyone questioned his credibility. Not saying
> your friend is wrong mind you (and Mike didn't either) but
> credibility is certainly no assurnace of being correct.
You're right. I misinterpreted Mike's comment.
> That's a pretty broad statement since you really have no idea
> what education or experience anyone here has but I can see how
> you could assume that.
Thanks for understandfing my POV. I think this guy is brilliant - he
once explained the life of a pill once you swallow it and I was in awe.
He's a treasure trove of info on bio-chemistry.
> Welcome to our little group.
Thank you. It's been very informative and I'm glad I found it and hope
to contribute meaningfully.
> Somehow I think you already knew the answer to this and
> apparently assumed all retailers are crooks. Being wary of
> retailers is a healthy attitude I think but totally misplaced
> in this instance. A deja search of all Mike's posts in this
> newsgroup will verify that.
I honestly did not read Mike's signature info. I usually focus on the
content of the mesage and ignore the sig because most of the time it has
a person's homepage and other personal stuff that's not directed at me
specifically. I will make amends by comparing his prices to JBNs. Thanks
again for the welcome.
Mike Berg
wrote:
>My sincere apologies to Mike Berg for my overzealous argument. I
>honestly did not read your signature info and did not intend to state
>that *all* supplement retailers were unscrupulous.
Thank you. I'm sure that wasn't your intent.
>You're right. I misinterpreted Mike's comment.
Easily done. No sweat.
>
>Thanks for understandfing my POV. I think this guy is brilliant - he
>once explained the life of a pill once you swallow it and I was in awe.
>He's a treasure trove of info on bio-chemistry.
I'm sure he is. And my reply was not meant to slam him. However I
know of *many* PhD's who have no clue as to nutrition or training.
That was my only point.
And also, thanks to SteveL for the "backup". Unfortunately, the Ed's
and Mike's of the industry are few and far between.
Ed Sturm
Sandman <San...@team.camaroz28.com> wrote in message
news:83h9io$1gp$1...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net...
> Matt Bickford <Ma...@saturnpestcontrol.spam.com> wrote in message
> news:gmV64.20$Xe....@wdc-read-01.qwest.net...
> > I think the genetic thing is given too much weight.
>
> i disagree. its at least 50%. no matter how hard i work, no matter what
i
> do i can never make my bone structure any larger. no matter how good i
make
> myself look, i could never win if standing beside someone with the same
> build, who just happens to stand 6'4".
but you can still train yourself to look damn good for your particular bone
structure.
--
Ed Sturm
Hard Bodies Discount Supplements
____________________________
http://www.hardbodiessupplements.com
http://www.hbsupplements.com
http://www.edsturm.com
Ed Sturm
Archon <arc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:385C1340...@worldnet.att.net...
> Mike Berg wrote:
> > So that means what? Just because he has nothing to gain doesn't mean
> > he's correct.
>
> The fact that he has nothing to gain underscores his credibility. The
> guy who sells umbrellas will always tell you it looks like its going to
> rain.
>
> Did you miss the line about the guy having a PhD?
Uhhh, who cares???? Are you saying that because he has a PHD that this
means he has more knowledge and experience with regards to weightlifting and
supplementation than a seasoned and experienced lifter???????????????????
In addition to spending 6 years in school -after- college, he has 19 years
of work experience. He knows more about chemical substances and how they
work in the human body than you, or I, or any personal trainer in this
newsgroup.
I beg to differ. Perhaps posting a photo of him will add to his
credibility. I mean, if he is so much more knowledgeabel than anyone here,
surely he will also have a superior pysique.
>
> The truth hurts - especially those who rip-off others by selling
supplements that offer no benefit. This includes those who sell supplement
catalogs for $5 a month under the guise of motivational magazines. They
don't emphasize the fact that genetics plays a big part in how you look.
They take advantage of DYSMORPHIA - a body image problem. That's equivalent
to selling "look pretty" and vomit-inducing
> pills to girls with anorexia and bulemia.
>
> Everything you need to know could fit in one good-sized magazine or book.
But then how would the publishers and charlatans make a fortune-every month-
off of earnest but ill-informed athletes. The formula for fitness is:
>
> Basic Knowledge (technique & nutrition) + Hard Work + Consistency
True.
>
> Protein and creatine help but there are no shortcuts and no magic potions.
True but does one need a PHD to know this?
I know builders who have enviable musculatures who don't use
> either. Most other supplements are a waste of money. Don't be gullible -
find a real authority before you spend your money.
>
> I don't understand why you are so hostile about this. Do you sell
supplements?
I can tell by your facetious tone that you are new here. Perhaps read,
watch, listen, learn and get to know people before ranting and raving and
being judgemental.
Yes, I DO sell supplements. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to post
my advertisement.
--
Ed Sturm
Hard Bodies Discount Supplements
____________________________
http://www.hardbodiessupplements.com
http://www.hbsupplements.com
http://www.edsturm.com
>
>
>
>
Ed Sturm
Matt Bickford <Ma...@saturnpestcontrol.spam.com> wrote in message
news:gmV64.20$Xe....@wdc-read-01.qwest.net...
not
> everyone will look like arnold or even the average IFBB pro .. almost all
> men can attain an outstanding physique. I'd guess [40% Nutrition] [30%
> Training] [25% Pharmaceuticals] and [5% genetics]
>
> Matt
I agree with this.
--
Ed Sturm
Hard Bodies Discount Supplements
____________________________
http://www.hardbodiessupplements.com
http://www.hbsupplements.com
http://www.edsturm.com
>
> Clint Bateman <cli...@pdq.net> wrote in message
> news:m_U64.10663$Ke.5...@tw11.nn.bcandid.com...
> > Well you will probably not get a Arnold like physique by taking steroids
> > either unless you have good genetics to begin with.
> >
> >
> > Matt Bickford <Ma...@saturnpestcontrol.spam.com> wrote in message
> > news:ADU64.17$Xe....@wdc-read-01.qwest.net...
> > > I'd do anabolic injectables before I'd do those stupid pro-hormones
for
> > any
> > > length of time. Steroids have been tested and are known to be safe
when
> > used
> > > correctly .. these friggin pro-hormones aren't even regulated .. they
> can
> > > put whatever the hell they want to in them and claim that they do
pretty
> > > much anything .. Although I believe some may offer some benefit , I
> don;t
> > > think it's substantila. In other words you will not build an
arnoldesque
> > > physique by taking creatine.
> > >
> > > Matt
> > >
> > > Archon <arc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> > > news:385C1340...@worldnet.att.net...
> > > > Mike Berg wrote:
> > > > > So that means what? Just because he has nothing to gain doesn't
> mean
> > > > > he's correct.
> > > >
> > > > The fact that he has nothing to gain underscores his credibility.
The
> > > > guy who sells umbrellas will always tell you it looks like its going
> to
> > > > rain.
> > > >
> > > > Did you miss the line about the guy having a PhD? In addition to
> > > > spending 6 years in school -after- college, he has 19 years of work
> > > > experience. He knows more about chemical substances and how they
work
> in
> > > > the human body than you, or I, or any personal trainer in this
> > > > newsgroup.
> > > >
> > > > The truth hurts - especially those who rip-off others by selling
> > > > supplements that offer no benefit. This includes those who sell
> > > > supplement catalogs for $5 a month under the guise of motivational
> > > > magazines. They don't emphasize the fact that genetics plays a big
> part
> > > > in how you look. They take advantage of DYSMORPHIA - a body image
> > > > problem. That's equivalent to selling "look pretty" and
vomit-inducing
> > > > pills to girls with anorexia and bulemia.
> > > >
> > > > Everything you need to know could fit in one good-sized magazine or
> > > > book. But then how would the publishers and charlatans make a
fortune
> > > > -every month- off of earnest but ill-informed athletes. The formula
> for
> > > > fitness is:
> > > >
> > > > Basic Knowledge (technique & nutrition) + Hard Work + Consistency
> > > >
> > > > Protein and creatine help but there are no shortcuts and no magic
> > > > potions. I know builders who have enviable musculatures who don't
use
> > > > either. Most other supplements are a waste of money. Don't be
> gullible -
> > > > find a real authority before you spend your money.
> > > >
> > > > I don't understand why you are so hostile about this. Do you sell
> > > > supplements?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
Ed Sturm
Steve L <sl...@interpath.com> wrote in message
news:83itor$el6$1...@gaddy.interpath.net...
> :> So that means what? Just because he has nothing to gain doesn't mean
> :> he's correct.
> :
> :The fact that he has nothing to gain underscores his credibility. The
> :guy who sells umbrellas will always tell you it looks like its going to
> :rain.
>
>
> wrong mind you (and Mike didn't either) but credibility is certainly no
> assurnace of being correct.
>
only
> the unscrupulous ones who place the importance of selling umbrellas above
> their personal ethics.
APPLAUSE!!!!!!!!!!!!
Matt Staples
Ed Sturm wrote:
>
> Matt Bickford <Ma...@saturnpestcontrol.spam.com> wrote in message
> news:gmV64.20$Xe....@wdc-read-01.qwest.net...
> > I think the genetic thing is given too much weight. While it's true that
> not
> > everyone will look like arnold or even the average IFBB pro .. almost all
> > men can attain an outstanding physique. I'd guess [40% Nutrition] [30%
> > Training] [25% Pharmaceuticals] and [5% genetics]
> >
> > Matt
>
> I agree with this.
Matt, I agree with you in theory but I have a different opinion on the
percentages. I've heard of some pros and top amateurs that have great
genetics who use much less drugs to gain size, get ripped, lose water,
etc. So if you are talking in terms of what separates them from each
other, as opposed to what separates them from the general population, I
would say that the percentages break down as such:
1. Genetics: 50%
2. Training: 30%
3. Pharmaceuticals: 20%
Just my opinion, based on some that I've talked to and stuff I've heard.
--
Matt Staples
http://www.thegym.net/mbbfr
Archon
> Uhhh, who cares???? Are you saying that because he has a PHD that > this means he has more knowledge and experience with regards to
> weightlifting and supplementation than a seasoned and experienced > lifter???????????????????
No. I never said he was an expert bodybuilder - and he doesn't need to
be in order to evaluate the efficacy of supplements. I said he was an
expert in chemical substances and what they do - or do not do - in the
human body. Considering his education and experience, I would rank him
as high as anyone who has a similar background in biochemistry, and
higher than anyone without a similar background, even if they do lift.
See my next comment below...
> I beg to differ. Perhaps posting a photo of him will add to his
> credibility. I mean, if he is so much more knowledgeabel than anyone > here, surely he will also have a superior pysique.
With all due respect, that's bad logic. Explain how being an expert in
biochemistry leads to the conclusion that he has a superior physique?
His looks are irrelevant - it's his supp knowledge that was being
debated.
> Protein and creatine help but there are no shortcuts and no magic
> True but does one need a PHD to know this?
No, that was my non-PhD opinion - really just a statement of the obvious
in an argument against flashy mags that try to give impressionable folks
the idea that you need a lot of stuff (chemicals and gadgets) to be a
successful recreational bodybuilder or fitness enthusiast. I'm 100%
natural and still an intermediate in terms of my build and knowledge of
isolating certain muscles.
> I can tell by your facetious tone that you are new here. Perhaps > read, watch, listen, learn and get to know people before ranting and > raving and being judgemental. Yes, I DO sell supplements. Thank you > for giving me the opportunity to post my advertisement.
I am new to this NG, but I was not being facetious. I honestly did not
read Mike's sig info at the bottom of his post. I wasn't ranting - I
merely stated my opinions with conviction, and I stick by them. If
you'll read my original post, you'll see I never named any firm
specifically. It just turned out that those in this NG who sell
supplements thought I was referring to them, which I wasn't.
I read your bio and articles on the ASW website and see that our
opinions are similar, so I will emphasize that I was not referring to
you. Mike Berg, Steve L. and I exchanged a few posts and squared these
misunderstandings away a few days ago.
I wasn't trying to be an a-hole or piss anyone off, so I hope that we
can correspond amicably in the future.
Calgary Rob
the supplements. People buy them and believe in them, they also stick to
working out in order for them to work. Therefor, they get results, whether
or not it was caused by the supplements. You chem buddy would agree with
that. I doubt he would agree with the words you are putting in his mouth.
Some of the supplements are rather good, and I am sure many aren't.
--
Calgary Rob
I like Gravy
calga...@home.com
Archon
> If placebos work in 33% of cases, then that is a high rate of success
- the test groups are the ones that get the real substance. Any changes
in the control group are psychological and short lived. My point was
that any company that sells a "placebo" or useless substance and calls
it a supplement is unethical.
> for the supplements. People buy them and believe in them, they also
> stick to working out in order for them to work. Therefor, they get
> results, whether or not it was caused by the supplements.
That's debatable, but for the sake of argument, let's say it's true.
Don't you think a person who is proud of being 100% natural can also be
driven to maintain a high level of intensity? The person who uses
supplements with little or no biological benefit might work out as
intensely and show the same results, but will also be less wealthy than
the guy who doesn't need to spend $60+ bucks an month to get motivated.
I guess that's my key point - if motivation doesn't come from within,
bodybuilding loses its mental benefits.
By keeping it simple, you build discipline and confidence as well as
muscles, and you don't make unethical companies rich.
(and you can afford to buy new 50 lb. solid dumbells)
Lots of people still think guys who work out are dumb, and when they
find how much we spend on supplements, it just reenforces that
prejudice.
> You chem buddy would agree with that. I doubt he would agree with the > words you are putting in his mouth.
Now you are putting words in his mouth - I didn't quote him verbatim but
it was along the lines of the "expensive urine" post that was here on
ASW. Most of the stuff in my posts was my opinion supported by strong
logic that many people share.
> Some of the supplements are rather good, and I am sure many aren't.
We are in agreement. I've gotten much fitter by working out and I only
use stuff that's equivalent to eating a good meal - whey protein,
creatine, and vitamins. My opinions are similar to those in Ed Sturm's
bio on the ASW webpage, and I am glad this NG has a "natural" focus.
Thrasher
role in it, maybe 5-15%, but its nutrition and how hard you work at it
that make up the bulk of it on average men.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Ed Sturm
> Ed Sturm wrote:
> > Uhhh, who cares???? Are you saying that because he has a PHD that >
this means he has more knowledge and experience with regards to
> > weightlifting and supplementation than a seasoned and experienced >
lifter???????????????????
>
> No. I never said he was an expert bodybuilder - and he doesn't need to be
in order to evaluate the efficacy of supplements.
But how can he evaluate something without the practical useage of it in a
controlled environment with a proper training and nutritional program?
I said he was an expert in chemical substances and what they do - or do not
do - in the human body. Considering his education and experience, I would
rank him
> as high as anyone who has a similar background in biochemistry, and higher
than anyone without a similar background, even if they do lift.
> See my next comment below...
>
> > I beg to differ. Perhaps posting a photo of him will add to his
credibility. I mean, if he is so much more knowledgeabel than anyone >
here, surely he will also have a superior pysique.
>
> With all due respect, that's bad logic. Explain how being an expert in
biochemistry leads to the conclusion that he has a superior physique? His
looks are irrelevant - it's his supp knowledge that was being debated.
I think you know what I meant by that.
>
>
> > Protein and creatine help but there are no shortcuts and no magic
> > True but does one need a PHD to know this?
>
> No, that was my non-PhD opinion - really just a statement of the obvious
in an argument against flashy mags that try to give impressionable folks the
idea that you need a lot of stuff (chemicals and gadgets) to be a successful
recreational bodybuilder or fitness enthusiast.
ok, agreed and actually quite factual. I am not in any way shape or form an
advoacate for the magazines deceptive advertising practices.
I'm 100% natural and still an intermediate in terms of my build and
knowledge of isolating certain muscles.
>
>
> > I can tell by your facetious tone that you are new here. Perhaps >
read, watch, listen, learn and get to know people before ranting and >
raving and being judgemental. Yes, I DO sell supplements. Thank you > for
giving me the opportunity to post my advertisement.
>
> I am new to this NG, but I was not being facetious. I honestly did not
read Mike's sig info at the bottom of his post. I wasn't ranting - I merely
stated my opinions with conviction, and I stick by them.
and you have every right to do so but I kind of believe that newbies to the
group should get to know people and lurk for awhile before coming across
with such strong opinions.
If you'll read my original post, you'll see I never named any firm
specifically. It just turned out that those in this NG who sell> supplements
thought I was referring to them, which I wasn't.
Ok, I was under the impression that you were taking shots at either Mike, I
or both, or the supplement industry as a whole. I now understand your tone.
>
> I read your bio and articles on the ASW website and see that our opinions
are similar, so I will emphasize that I was not referring to you. Mike Berg,
Steve L. and I exchanged a few posts and squared these misunderstandings
away a few days ago.
>
> I wasn't trying to be an a-hole or piss anyone off, so I hope that we> can
correspond amicably in the future.
absolutely. Your knowledge and opinions are more than welcome.
Calgary Rob
> If placebos work in 33% of cases, then that is a high rate of success
Placebos don't "work" - they are used in control groups in lab settings
- the test groups are the ones that get the real substance. Any changes
in the control group are psychological and short lived. My point was
that any company that sells a "placebo" or useless substance and calls
it a supplement is unethical.
You are wrong with how these experiments are typically conducted. Very
wrong. The control group are the ones not taking anything. They are used
to determine the effects of the placebo's and the others taking the real
thing. They are totally independent from the placebo, and from the true
'medication', 'supplement' or what have you. The people taking the placebo
and the people taking the true drug both think they are taking the true
drug. They are rarely told after which they were taking. Ethics are
another thread altogether. Many of these supplements work. It would have
been nice if you distinguished which ones are making you cry rather then
striking out against all of them.
> for the supplements. People buy them and believe in them, they also
> stick to working out in order for them to work. Therefor, they get
> results, whether or not it was caused by the supplements.
That's debatable, but for the sake of argument, let's say it's true.
Don't you think a person who is proud of being 100% natural can also be
driven to maintain a high level of intensity? The person who uses
supplements with little or no biological benefit might work out as
intensely and show the same results, but will also be less wealthy than
the guy who doesn't need to spend $60+ bucks an month to get motivated.
I guess that's my key point - if motivation doesn't come from within,
bodybuilding loses its mental benefits.
By keeping it simple, you build discipline and confidence as well as
muscles, and you don't make unethical companies rich.
(and you can afford to buy new 50 lb. solid dumbells)
Lots of people still think guys who work out are dumb, and when they
find how much we spend on supplements, it just reenforces that
prejudice.
Since when did supplements mean not natural? I think perhaps you should
distinguish here which supplements are soiling your pants, and which
supplements you dont consider natural. As for the person working out on
supplements, he may also be benefiting from them. He may be losing as well.
You are right about that. But when a guy nails that supplement that does so
well for him, he reaps major rewards. Isn't this a free market? Buyer
beware? He may often lose money to crap supplements, but I would imagine
those business' if they are fraudulent wont be around for long, and those
good business', they should be around a while. The supplement may not have
done well with one person, but it could do wonders for someone else.
Especially true in the weight room atmosphere, where word of mouth can mean
everything to a supplement company/product. You may lift for 'mental
benefits', but I went to university. I am also curious where supplements
hamper motivation, as you are suggesting, and also how you correlate
motivation and mental benefits. Did you not proof read? I never realized
that there was a prejudice like you describe. In fact, I doubt it
altogether, and I doubt very much that anyone who did think that way would
matter in my life anyway. I do know what you are talking about though, as
people typically think that huge guys are real idiots, but I also think that
most people see extreme people as being idiots as well. I highly doubt the
supplement issue would reinforce that so called prejudice, when all aspects
of society tend to spend money on thing they need, and things they dont
need.
> You chem buddy would agree with that. I doubt he would agree with the >
words you are putting in his mouth.
Now you are putting words in his mouth - I didn't quote him verbatim but
it was along the lines of the "expensive urine" post that was here on
ASW. Most of the stuff in my posts was my opinion supported by strong
logic that many people share.
I haven't seen much strong logic supporting your claim. In fact, I think,
as I am sure most of think, that you haven't been around many people taking
many of the beneficial supplements. Peoples eyes often glow when speaking
about the gains from creatine or whatever. Your buddy may be a chemist, but
he is probably like this one person I know with all fitness certificates.
He doesn't know a thing about weights. He will argue to the end about
anything weight room related though. You learn what is true, and you learn
what really works (as compared to what the lab guys tell us AKA your chemist
buddy).
> Some of the supplements are rather good, and I am sure many aren't.
We are in agreement. I've gotten much fitter by working out and I only
use stuff that's equivalent to eating a good meal - whey protein,
creatine, and vitamins. My opinions are similar to those in Ed Sturm's
bio on the ASW webpage, and I am glad this NG has a "natural" focus.
Whey protein, creatine, and vitamins? Are these not supplements? Have I
simply lost focus of what you were trying to say? I am not going to go
through this whole thread to find out what you meant, so please reinform me.
Calgary Rob
would be much greater. Some people get big sleeping!
--
Andrew Stranz
1)Cheaper than a real mean
2) more convenient thatn a real meal
3)almost no fat content. If you intake fat, your body has to use water
in order to digest the fat, wehich leaves your muscless LESS volumized
4) Protein in liquid form is much fast absorbed by your muscles.
People that say "protein goes down the toilent" are making generalized
statements. An average man can absorb around 30 grams of protein per
sitting. As long as the protein is spread out ito numberous meals, he
can intake 200 grams of protein AND HAVE HIS MUSCLES USE IT!!! They key
is not to eat 3 meals a day with 60-70 grams of protein per sitting.
...My 2 cents!
Andrew
(new addition to the thread/group, and from what I see, I am very
impressed!)
BobMac wrote:
>
> Archon wrote in message <3859C154...@worldnet.att.net>...
>
> >
> >FYI: He also said protein supplements are useful, but said most of the
> >other stuff goes into the toilet.
> >
> >
> Old quote from a European coach, looking at the supplementation regimes in
> the new world: "American athletes must have the most expensive urine in the
> world..."
Andrew Stranz
Well, I hope I was understood!