Majority of UFC fighters, models, athletes, movie actors are on roids

[latino158]

pretty much every person that is constantly in the spotlight for millions to see. You name it, UFC fighters, fitness models, athletes, action movie actors, and pretty much every single muscular and ripped physique you see in movies and on TV is more than likely on something. Look at Lance Armstrong, mediocre physique, where nobody would suspect a god damn thing, yet he was on a coktail of roids, HGH, and so many other drugs.

The biggest proof is the thousands of men who go to the gym, yet despite their greatest efforts, don't even come close to looking as good as these celebs and athletes. They all compete in the spotlight where looks are EVERYTHING and you are constantly judged on them. Look at, how they destroy channing tantum when he goes from 8% to 15% bodyfat, or when they become softer after a movie role.

Where there is fame, career advancement, stardom, respect, admiration, desire from women and millions of dollars on the line, where having a little more muscle, less fat, speed or strength than the other guy, can make you or break you. Then, you can bet your ass they are going to use everything in their arsenal.

How come you rarely see men in REAL LIFE who look as good as these celebrities and athletes, and the ones that do are obviously on roids as well. You'd be surprised how many men use steroids nowadays. It is not longer the bodybuilders, but now police officers, firefighters, security, bouncers, doctors, nurses, college students and even regular people are using the juice. It is that easy and not that expensive to obtain.

I have met guys who I thought were natural, only for them to reveal that they were on something. They talk about it openly and don't give a ****.

 

[AttackFormation]

False.

I know and see plenty of guys in the gym who look better. And i know for a fact they are not on roids. I don't think anyone in the NBA is using steroids, although I do believe that LeBron James did use HGH for a period of time (or he just developed too early on in life, as at age 18 he looked like a thirty year old man, whereas someone like me looks my age).

Yes some celebs are on them. But who really cares?

You are naive in this regard bro. Professional athletes from cyclists to fighters to American footballers are on all kinds of stuff and so are a whole lot of laymen gym goers. The OP is spot on.

 

[Young OG]

Maybe so. But I am quite familiar with some professional body builders / pro athletes (not the famous type) who get tested. They tell me the process and obviously they never test positive so in that regard, maybe I just know some genetic freaks.

I agree with the OP. Some of them know when they are going to to be tested, so they can make sure they are clean when the test comes.

 

[AttackFormation]

Maybe so. But I am quite familiar with some professional body builders / pro athletes (not the famous type) who get tested. They tell me the process and obviously they never test positive so in that regard, maybe I just know some genetic freaks.

Haha, come on Ruler. You are smarter than that. The murderer explained to you how he can't be guilty so he can't be right? Those tests are a sham unless they are tested randomly by a competent team that is actually out to catch them and/or they are stupid enough to not cycle properly. You gotta understand that there is organisation around maintaining the illusion of being drug free, just like there are coaches for their athletic skills they have people who make sure their drug use is on point. Another thing they like to do to prove how natural they are is to enter "natural" bodybuilding competitions. They also use stuff like "genetic freak(s)" to explain it which is a load of BS, and they use shame too - anyone who thinks they're a user is obviously just a hating loser who doesn't work as hard as they do. They lie to themselves and to the public, posting mantras about hard work and dedication when taking steroids and being untrained makes you bigger than a trained person who doesn't take them. Much of sports history is really just a parade of drug users. Mike Tyson vs Lennox Lewis, they are both on juice. Alistair Overeem, Brock Lesnar, Hector Lombard, even guys like Jon Jones and many more who have and have not yet been busted - they are all on drugs. I could add more examples of juicers all day long but the point should come across.There is an arsenal of drugs too, they can do all kinds of things and the doses people take can be smaller or bigger. Just because someone isn't a dead giveaway of steroid use doesn't mean they are drug free.

You've been had by the lies of professional and hobby drug users who want to maintain their image, just like most people, as a result of the organised and thought out obscuration, misleading information, and outright lying put out by these various people. It's very understandable, because all of those people can't be lying right? it can't be a charade to that degree, and everyone else believes what they say too so surely it isn't! This guy is just a loony trying to smear their careers and physiques. #HardWork

When you figure this stuff out yourself in a few years you will look back and might be grateful for the blinders being removed.

 

[AttackFormation]

@AttackFormation @Young OG

You guys make good points. I am being naive and I do need to face reality. Your arguments have changed my opinion to a certain degree, although I do really know genetic freaks. For instance, my great grandfather was 5'10 and close to 300 pounds of muscle. His legs were absolute tree trunks and he was, for all intents and purposes, a "freak". Now I have a small frame, so maybe I'm too ignorant and taking people's integrity for granted.

I don't mean to belittle your great grandfather so don't take this as doing so. But you cannot naturally be 5'10 and 300 pounds of muscle, because human bodies don't work that way. When the average is deviated from beyond around a certain point, it is either because of drugs or disorders like gigantism (when the body doesn't stop producing growth hormone). That's the reason why you can't just stuff steroids in yourself willy-nilly in the first place, because when you do so you cause disorder since humans are not meant to have those kinds of hormonal make ups. So, and again with respect, he was either extremely fat, on steroids, both, or not 300 pounds at 5'10.

You and other people reading this thread can go to www.nattyornot.com as a starting point for putting the blinders off, if you'd like to. There's a ton of articles, so I'd recommend going by the categories rather than starting in the feed.

 

[PeasantPlayer]

How come you rarely see men in REAL LIFE who look as good as these celebrities and athletes, and the ones that do are obviously on roids as well

Won't judge the men, but I seen women in real life who look better then the hollywood scarlets who have professional make-up artists, listen people are stupid and any narative the media feeds people, the bandwagon will grow. Hollywood is not good looking

 

[AttackFormation]

@AttackFormation I will be sure to check it out. I believe it was 5'10" and 270, to be exact. This was when he was in his prime, working in the steel mills of Pennsylvania and hauling lumber around his property. My grandfather once flipped a Model T and was trapped underneath with a friend. His father came out and flipped the thing himself, with is bare hands.

Now maybe this is the effect of folk tale, but I've seen pictures of this man. Not fat but he had massive bone structure and, as I said, had a very physically demanding job. He was of German descent and unfortunately died of some issue with his heart, which I know is related to hormone production issues (my whole family lineage is littered with these heart diseases).

I'm sure he was big and tough but even 5'10 270 pounds is far, far beyond the natural range and AFAIK there are no disorders that selectively cause supernatural hypertrophy. Let me put it into perspective - Ronnie Coleman, a professional drug user from the era when more kinds of drugs like growth hormone and insulin-like growth factor were popularised, is/was 298 pounds and 5'11. That's a guy who like the rest of them, used anything there was as much as he could. Earlier drug users like Serge Nubret and Arnold Schwarznegger weighed less than your great grandfather at 200-217 6' and 235-240 at 6'2 pounds respectively. The very physically demanding job helps but it cannot take him beyond what's possible naturally. Again this is just to help you get some insight, don't take this as me arguing with you.

 

[latino158]

I never said that all of them are on steroids, many of them are. Think about it, if you were offered fame, women, and thousands, if not millions of dollars, wouldn't you do ANYTHING? I know I would do, especially when there is so much pressure on you, and millions watching you, expecting the very best.

Look at superhero actors such as the rock, wolverine, superman, thor, captain american, and so many others, where their career was built all thanks to their looks and physique. You can bet your ass they are going to use steroids when there is so much on the line and they probably get it prescripted and are followed by doctors.

If anything, bodybuilders are losers, they use so many steroids and for what? Many are broke and have to resort to gay for pay. At least, the athletes and movie starts are making money and getting famous, their steroid use is more justified, it actually pays off.

 

[raider87]

I knew a fighter that would juice when he wasn't in preparation for a fight so he could keep the gains later.

 

[latino158]

It should be legal for every man after 30 years old to use TRT

Most men walk around with low test and don't even know it. Also, the main reason why many cannot make good gains is because of below average testosterone. Think about it, why do you think men have more muscle than women? Even if a woman lifts weights for years, she will never be as big as a man naturally. How come young men have more muscle than old men? How come when a woman uses steroids, she becomes like a man? Steroids are nothing more than synthetic testosterone.

Unfortunately, bodybuilding is mostly dependent on hormones. If you have low testosterone, you can bust your ass in the gym all you want, and your results will be pathetic, just as a natural woman or old man results would be. Your only solution is to supplement with testosterone, but to be prescribed TRT, the medical community requires you to have the test levels of 90 years old man or teenage girl. You cannot win and your only solution is to break the law and inject "steroids"

 

[Mot1veProgress]

False.

I know and see plenty of guys in the gym who look better. And i know for a fact they are not on roids. I don't think anyone in the NBA is using steroids, although I do believe that LeBron James did use HGH for a period of time (or he just developed too early on in life, as at age 18 he looked like a thirty year old man, whereas someone like me looks my age).

Yes some celebs are on them. But who really cares?

You don't know for a fact. Don't ever say something that innocently stupid.

When you're in one position and perspective, your perspective is never the ultimate perspective. Just because you're not in the know, does not mean you're right.

I've known not one but two people who sold steroids for a living and made tons of money doing so.. The reality of how many people have done at least 1 steroid cycle in your average good gym in a big city like Chicago is.... pretty astounding

 

[Yewki]

Look at Lance Armstrong, mediocre physique, where nobody would suspect a god damn thing, yet he was on a coktail of roids, HGH, and so many other drugs.

FYI, Armstrong was using entirely different drugs and methods. The stuff he used was mainly EPO and it would enhance aerobic capacity by allowing his body to carry more oxygen in his blood. He would also store his own blood and then inject it later for the same purpose. Nothing he took was intended to gain muscle or look ripped, just the opposite. Muscle is basically dead weight in cycling. The sport is all about aerobic ability. That's why he looked like a skeleton and was around 2-3% body fat in his prime.

 

[PeasantPlayer]

Sucks to find out most of the "greats" are cheaters or took shortcuts

 

[Colossus]

I've been in/around steroids and even on the legal prescribing side for many years. I've been both a natural and "unnatural" powerlifter, a regular joe who lifts, and been around every intensity of PED use from IFBB pro bodybuilders to recreational meatheads who just dabble in it.

One thing I have found is that those who DO use them tend to downplay their effectiveness, and those who don't, or never have, tend to dramatically overestimate their effectiveness.

One surefire way to tell if someone has never used anabolics is to find the "crusaders". You know, the guys who accuse any pro athlete or anyone who is better than them in some physical way of doping; or who make excuses for their own lack of results. "Well, I could bench 400 or play D1 college ball or __________ if I juiced too..."

No, you couldn't. You'd probably still be an average bro, just a bigger and stronger average bro making other excuses. And guess what, those pros who dope?? They would still be excelling (albeit to a lesser degree) even they never touched a steroid.

Doping in sport is a massive topic, but if we are just talking about anabolic/androgenic steroids (AAS), they all basically work by the same mechanism. Their results will differ somewhat but essentially they make your efforts in the gym go farther, your rest intervals shorter, and give about a 10-20% (at best) increase in performance, all other factors being equal. A couple of informal studies have looked at all-time world record powerlifting totals, both tested and untested, and found a 5-20% difference in these totals favoring the enhanced lifters, with the average being about 10%. That means, at the world stage, the STRONGEST lifters in the world are only differing by about 10% in the same weight class when you factor in anabolic steroid use. Not quite as dramatic as you'd think, right? And powerlifting is a pure, absolute strength sport. There is no athleticism or aerobic variables to account for.

The point is, Brian Shaw (current World's Strongest Man) would still be astoundingly strong if he never touched a steroid, and Lance Armstrong would still be a world-class cyclist if he never doped. These guys have not only a fair amount of natural ability (better leverages, joint circumferences, muscle fiber composition, etc.), but also a supranormal work ethic and a chip on their shoulder to prove they are the best at what they do.

I do agree that the majority of athletes at the professional level are doping to some degree, but it's sport-specific. I don't think many NBAers are hitting up the juice, there would be little benefit. It's a game of finesse and teamwork. Even MMA....PEDs are a big issue in MMA but I just dont think they confer the advantage people think they do. Look at all the fighters in recent years who have gotten popped and still lost. There are just too many variables in fighting.

And if you wanna talk about the subject of "cheating".... how come people don't consider IV rehydration before a fight cheating? (it's now banned in the UFC) Or sleeping in a hyperbaric chamber for endurance sports? Or prolotherapy? or even 100% O2 on the sidelines of a football game? All of these things confer a performance advantage--some arguably more so than PEDs-- we just don't view them all as "cheating".

 

[AttackFormation]

Doping in sport is a massive topic, but if we are just talking about anabolic/androgenic steroids (AAS), they all basically work by the same mechanism. Their results will differ somewhat but essentially they make your efforts in the gym go farther, your rest intervals shorter, and give about a 10-20% (at best) increase in performance, all other factors being equal. A couple of informal studies have looked at all-time world record powerlifting totals, both tested and untested, and found a 5-20% difference in these totals favoring the enhanced lifters, with the average being about 10%. That means, at the world stage, the STRONGEST lifters in the world are only differing by about 10% in the same weight class when you factor in anabolic steroid use. Not quite as dramatic as you'd think, right? And powerlifting is a pure, absolute strength sport. There is no athleticism or aerobic variables to account for.

I do agree that the majority of athletes at the professional level are doping to some degree, but it's sport-specific. I don't think many NBAers are hitting up the juice, there would be little benefit. It's a game of finesse and teamwork. Even MMA....PEDs are a big issue in MMA but I just dont think they confer the advantage people think they do. Look at all the fighters in recent years who have gotten popped and still lost. There are just too many variables in fighting.

And if you wanna talk about the subject of "cheating".... how come people don't consider IV rehydration before a fight cheating? (it's now banned in the UFC) Or sleeping in a hyperbaric chamber for endurance sports? Or prolotherapy? or even 100% O2 on the sidelines of a football game? All of these things confer a performance advantage--some arguably more so than PEDs-- we just don't view them all as "cheating".

Agree with your overall message, but some viewpoints on it:

1) Just because a competition is nominally tested doesn't mean it's clean. That along with the possible bias of the researchers means those informal studies are a liability. Drug users love to enter competitions expressively stated to be "natural" with "thorough testing".

2) I agree that they would still be great at what they do if they never touched a steroid, but a 10% (if we just for the sake of argument assume that the informal studies are true) increase is still a lot. If you weigh 80 kg when you start using drugs and you gain 10% of your body weight in muscle, that's 88 kg, a massive difference. If you already deadlift 180 kg when you start and you add 10%, that might mean the difference between a weight you can't get off the ground or blows your back out and one that doesn't. 10% of anything may or may not be big in absolute numbers (a 10% increase of a biceps curl might not be all that many kgs) but when you account for scale (the biceps doesn't lift a ton in the first place) it makes a significant difference. And again, that's only if these informal studies are to be believed. I personally strongly doubt that an average of 10% performance increase would result from drug use, that sounds like it'd be the argument of a juicer who wants to downplay the effects.

3) Agreed, and this is where things get difficult. The big difference to me is whether you try to hide something or not, ie. your morality. That's personally why I despise (most) steroid users. In competitive settings they use them to gain a mechanical advantage that they both want to hide from everyone else and don't want them to have. They use them because they want to rig the game unevenly in their favour by means of deception. If those people could infect their opponent with a virus prior to their fight, they would. Recreationally they use it not just for the vanity of wanting to have big muscles which is understandable, but for narcissistic reasons; they lie about being clean and/or the effects that steroids have because they want to convince both you and themselves of their superhumanity and thus have their narcissistic vision for themselves validated.

4) Yes, drugged up fighters can still lose even to natural fighters. But that doesn't exclude the possibility that the druggy's opponent was himself on the stuff.

 

[Maximus Rex]

 

[AttackFormation]

Only watched to 2:40 so can't speak for longer than that. But of what I did see, what he says is true and the fact that he admits to taking steroids means I hold nothing against his morality. BUT, the argument he makes that people have different genetics is something that has to be taken into account of who the person saying it is. Because while it's actually true to a point, it's also exactly the argument that druggies like to exaggerate to the extent that it becomes a lie precisely because the argument is otherwise true and it can make their lie seem more believable.

 

[Colossus]

Agree with your overall message, but some viewpoints on it:

1) Just because a competition is nominally tested doesn't mean it's clean. That along with the possible bias of the researchers means those informal studies are a liability. Drug users love to enter competitions expressively stated to be "natural" with "thorough testing".

Totally agree, but you have to look at what an athlete has to gain by competing enhanced in a "clean" (aka tested) sport. In strength sports (powerlifting, Olympic weightlifting, and strongman), there is little if any monetary or commercial gain from being a champion. No one even knows who these guys are outside of strength circles, and in the case of powerlifting, there are numerous tested and untested federations so a lifter can choose appropriately. There is really no glory or gain in entering a tested federation and then using gear just to set a some hollow record that no one cares about anyway.

With professional, paid athletics, it's another story. There is material and personal gain to be had by winning.

2) I agree that they would still be great at what they do if they never touched a steroid, but a 10% (if we just for the sake of argument assume that the informal studies are true) increase is still a lot. If you weigh 80 kg when you start using drugs and you gain 10% of your body weight in muscle, that's 88 kg, a massive difference. If you already deadlift 180 kg when you start and you add 10%, that might mean the difference between a weight you can't get off the ground or blows your back out and one that doesn't. 10% of anything may or may not be big in absolute numbers (a 10% increase of a biceps curl might not be all that many kgs) but when you account for scale (the biceps doesn't lift a ton in the first place) it makes a significant difference. And again, that's only if these informal studies are to be believed. I personally strongly doubt that an average of 10% performance increase would result from drug use, that sounds like it'd be the argument of a juicer who wants to downplay the effects.

Here's the link to the article where I got the study from, if you're interested. It's a long read. But the comparison is simply looking at current all-time world records (officially verified) and comparing the numbers from tested and untested federations. Doesn't take into account the possibility of deception (see above), or other training variables. It's just raw observational data. There are a few published studies out there that are interesting and mostly corroborative.

3) Agreed, and this is where things get difficult. The big difference to me is whether you try to hide something or not, ie. your morality. That's personally why I despise (most) steroid users. In competitive settings they use them to gain a mechanical advantage that they both want to hide from everyone else and don't want them to have. They use them because they want to rig the game unevenly in their favour by means of deception. If those people could infect their opponent with a virus prior to their fight, they would. Recreationally they use it not just for the vanity of wanting to have big muscles which is understandable, but for narcissistic reasons; they lie about being clean and/or the effects that steroids have because they want to convince both you and themselves of their superhumanity and thus have their narcissistic vision for themselves validated.

This narcissism we mostly see in bodybuilding and physique "sports" because of their narcissistic nature to begin with. But also consider the point of deception---if a fighter knows about 50-75% of his competition is using PEDs to some degree at any given time, is he really seeking to deceive the opposition?? Or just level the perceived playing field...Same with the NFL, etc

4) Yes, drugged up fighters can still lose even to natural fighters. But that doesn't exclude the possibility that the druggy's opponent was himself on the stuff.

Right, the whole well is tainted so who really knows but the fighters themselves. A clean test doesn't mean someone hasn't used...

See responses in red.

 

[Colossus]

I actually like Rich Piana in a way because he lays it all out there. Maybe not the brightest bulb around, but he is honest and genuine and will tell the world exactly what he has done.

If you want a good example of superior genetics, look no further than powerlifter Jesse Norris. He has lifted more weight for his weight class than anyone historically before him, and is out-lifting some guys who outweigh him by over 100 lbs. He has been drug tested in the IPF more than almost any lifter out there, and randomly at that. Now he recently failed a drug test for a banned pre-workout stimulant, but I truly believe this guy is lifetime anabolic-free. In addition to that, some little pre-workout OTC supplement isnt going to confer more than 5-10 lbs in any given lift, which is comparable to caffeine. I know what an enhanced lifter looks like, and again, there is absolutely zero gain for him to go through these elaborate doping routines to beat drug tests and hold these records. Narcissism?? No one even knew who this guy was until 6 months ago. If he was in it for narcissism he would have been broadcasting himself all over YouTube for years. When you've been doing this long enough, you just have to accept that some people's muscles, tendons, nerves are made of better things.

 

[AttackFormation]

1) There is more than material gain to competing in them. They don't do it to set records but so they can show proof of and pass as being natural.

2) That's what I suspected.

3) The question you have to ask is, is this pragmatic reason a conveniently available facade that gives them an excuse for something they would want to do anyway, or is it their genuine motivation?

4) Clean tests definitely don't mean someone hasn't used. That's pretty basic. Unless you know this and are being sarcastic.

5) Jesse Norris weighs 200 pounds at 5'9 while being shredded at the same time. Unless it can be demonstrated how his body manages to break the laws of nature, that guy is not natty. I'm sorry, but wanting to believe must give way to the reality of laws of physics. Humans do not deviate beyond a certain range without either external input (drugs) or disorder (gigantism, dwarfism, etc. - a malfunctioning body). Conveniently, this post of yours demonstrates exactly what I warned about the "genetics argument" one post earlier.