Genetic Potential

<div>
(scientific muscle @ Aug. 07 2006,21:24)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I have the same thing in my &quot;genetic potential&quot; chart, it says my thighs are almost as big as they will ever be , I think it says I can gain 1.5&quot; or something.  But Mind you that is at 8% bodyfta and thighs carry ALOT of bodyfat.  If you think about it, most fat is stored on thighs, glutes, and torso.  My thighs seem pathetic to me, and 1.5&quot; gain doesn't seem much, until I imagine my thighs 1.5&quot; bigger AND RIPPED!  If I had low bodyfat, with ripped defintion and 1.5&quot; larger, that wouldn't be so bad.  I am not sure what my bodyfat is, but my abs, lats and thighs are very UNRIPPED, I can barely see any definition, even if I don't have a gut or anything.</div>
We're all different bro. I carry ALL and I mean ALL of my fat in the midsection: everything else is tight and shows definition fairly well, even with this bulk going on. I NEVER had fat on my legs, could use some!
 
that calculator is pure bs.
very few people ever reach their genetic potential because very few, if any, KNOW what their genetic potential is.
I defy anyone here to describe their genetic potential. Actually someone DEFINE genetic potential?
 
I am beginning to think that genetic potential fluctuates with age and hormone levels (test levels for example). If the freaky guys can only hold their unnatural size when they are juicing then their size is a function of their test levels. Why should it be any different for natural trainers? I do appreciate that there may be more hyperplasia in folks on AAS so they may keep more size than if they had never juiced once they come off the stuff.
 
<div>
(Lol @ Aug. 19 2006,17:52)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I am beginning to think that genetic potential fluctuates with age and hormone levels (test levels for example). If the freaky guys can only hold their unnatural size when they are juicing then their size is a function of their test levels. Why should it be any different for natural trainers? I do appreciate that there may be more hyperplasia in folks on AAS so they may keep more size than if they had never juiced once they come off the stuff.</div>
You bring up a valid point and one that I have been contemplating lately. I have been researching AAS recently and I have decided to refrain 100%. And health reasons are only part of it. The main reason I decided to stay 100% natural is that prolonged hormone use can have permanent effects on the body's natural hormone production...i.e. using test injections to boost test-levels and grow huge muscles, then quitting test-injections and having the problem that your testes no longer produce anywhere near the amount of testosterone that they did before shutting down during the test-injections!
I know alot of guys (especially AAS users) will argue that this is not true, but it is a fact that prolonged hormone-use can have permanent effects on your testes and I don't want to risk even the smallest chance of curbing my body's own natural testosterone factory! I am a healthy male with natural raging testosterone and even if I'll never be as big as an IFBB pro, at least I'll probably have a higher natural test-level than any user will when we get older!
The bottom line is if you want to be a body-builder for life, then stay natural. If you don't give a crap about your long-term body-building ability (and health!) then by all means take AAS and get as big as you can short-term, but just know the sacrifice you are taking for the long run!
rock.gif
 
<div>
(scientific muscle @ Aug. 19 2006,20:55)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(Lol @ Aug. 19 2006,17:52)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I am beginning to think that genetic potential fluctuates with age and hormone levels (test levels for example). If the freaky guys can only hold their unnatural size when they are juicing then their size is a function of their test levels. Why should it be any different for natural trainers? I do appreciate that there may be more hyperplasia in folks on AAS so they may keep more size than if they had never juiced once they come off the stuff.</div>
You bring up a valid point and one that I have been contemplating lately.  I have been researching AAS recently and I have decided to refrain 100%.  And health reasons are only part of it.  The main reason I decided to stay 100% natural is that prolonged hormone use can have permanent effects on the body's natural hormone production...i.e. using test injections to boost test-levels and grow huge muscles, then quitting test-injections and having the problem that your testes no longer produce anywhere near the amount of testosterone that they did before shutting down during the test-injections!
I know alot of guys (especially AAS users) will argue that this is not true, but it is a fact that prolonged hormone-use can have permanent effects on your testes and I don't want to risk even the smallest chance of curbing my body's own natural testosterone factory!  I am a healthy male with natural raging testosterone and even if I'll never be as big as an IFBB pro, at least I'll probably have a higher natural test-level than any user will when we get older!
The bottom line is if you want to be a body-builder for life, then stay natural.  If you don't give a crap about your long-term body-building ability (and health!) then by all means take AAS and get as big as you can short-term, but just know the sacrifice you are taking for the long run!  
rock.gif
</div>
a fair point,but some of the details are off,i guess in some individuals perminent damage to testicular function is a possibility but most individuals recover with no long term effects.i must admit that prolonged and sustained use could cause serious recovery issues but having spent the best part of 6 months reading about them,im no longer convinced.there are other compounds that can delay/reverse the effects of steroid use but i will not go into them here.

at the end of the day aas are a short cut to your genetic limit or beyond,and it is dificult to maintain those gains without a proper diet and training regime.however im glad to see so many on here have chosen to stay natural,a wise choice to be safe.
 
Choice A- Train natural and work hard on diet and exercise to keep your health in top form and build a naturally strong, masculine physique.

Chioce B- Take the AAS to boost muscle gains, but take health (and legal) risks however 'small' they may be -all for an ultimately 'artificial' physique.

I am not saying either one is right or wrong, I am just saying that choice A is the healthier choice for a long-term body-building lifestyle.
smile.gif
 
To be fair, bodybuilding in itself is a health risk. Or were you under the impression that it is healthy to overeat and carry around more muscle than you would have otherwise?
 
<div>
(Totentanz @ Aug. 20 2006,08:50)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">To be fair, bodybuilding in itself is a health risk.  Or were you under the impression that it is healthy to overeat and carry around more muscle than you would have otherwise?</div>
mice which overeat die sooner and mice which are put on a calorie restricted diet, live longer. Bodybuilding is a health risk insofar that it requires lifting heavy metal which if dropped on various body parts tend to damage. Increased muscle mass or Lean body mass, is NOT in and of itself, a health risk, but rather the contrary, not only metabolically but biochemically even more so as one ages.
 
<div>
(Totentanz @ Aug. 20 2006,08:50)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">To be fair, bodybuilding in itself is a health risk.  Or were you under the impression that it is healthy to overeat and carry around more muscle than you would have otherwise?</div>
Yes, it is healthy to carry around muscle mass and strong bone density from heavy lifting, or were you under the impression that it is healthy to be inactive, weak and prone to falling down?
tounge.gif
 I don't over eat...as far as I will never be obese.

The whole point is we are discussing genetic potential, and obviously that potential changes with certain external drugs. I was just pointing out the reasons I prefer personally to aim for my natural potential and forget about my 'enhanced' potential.
 
<div>
(scientific muscle @ Aug. 20 2006,11:05)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">we are discussing genetic potential</div>
again, define genetic potential and how would you ever know ( natural or juiced) if you are even close to it?
 
<div>
(drpierredebs @ Aug. 20 2006,12:18)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(scientific muscle @ Aug. 20 2006,11:05)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">we are discussing genetic potential</div>
again, define genetic potential and how would you ever know ( natural or juiced) if you are even close to it?</div>
genetic potential- the biggest I can get personally with my overall genetic makeup.

How do I know I am getting close to it...well, it is pretty hard, but if I have HUGE muscles everywhere, then I am probably getting close to the point where my body will refuse to put on any more muscle.
laugh.gif
 
<div>
(scientific muscle @ Aug. 20 2006,11:25)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">genetic potential- the biggest I can get personally with my overall genetic makeup.
</div>
For most of us, add &quot;without using anabolic steroids or other illegal drugs&quot;, and that's what we mean.

The term &quot;genetic potential&quot; may not be a very good one. I suspect that there is a lot of variation, though I'm not sure how much it is tied to bone size as the calculator assumes. Based on some of the anecdotal reports I suspect that the calculator is not very accurate at all.

If it was it would be useful. If you were not growing and not near the potential indicated then you would know that you were probably doing something wrong. I'd hesitate to draw any conclusions based on that calculator, though.
 
Possible route to finding genetic potential??:

If a really big juiced up guy stopped taking anything, and if he carried on eating well and trying to lift as heavy as possible (and assuming his test levels returned to normal), would his body end up at a point that was close to his true natural genetic potential (but perhaps slightly larger due to hyperplasia from the roids)?

This is obviously a bit nuts as you would have to juice first to get big which is not what we want to do. It may also shift the goal posts somewhat and allow you to retain more size than you would ever have been able to achieve if you had never juiced (muscle memory?). I don't know.
rock.gif


Anyone know if ex bb'ers like Arny continue to use AAS on and off to keep their size?

-------------------------------------------

So, for most of us who want to stay natural, the term 'genetic potential' is almost pointless. We can't know what it is but we can keep striving to reach it!

Recorded data of other folk's achievements could be helpful as a guide to what we might expect. I don't think enough data is available yet though (the 'Results with HST' thread is useful but still quite new).

Perhaps in a few years time, after HST has been around long enough for plenty of folks to make good progress, we can collate a load of info and analyse it? The results could be published here for all to see and would act as a guide to the kind of results that might be possible in a certain length of time for a person eating and training correctly etc. Of course, that means we'll all have to keep accurate training logs and diet info. Sheesh! I can see it never happening.

What a lot of waffle!  
biggrin.gif
 
<div>
(Lol @ Aug. 20 2006,22:13)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Anyone know if ex bb'ers like Arny continue to use AAS on and off to keep their size?</div>
Probably not if this story is accurate.

Excerpt from the story, about 57 year old Arnie developing a spare tire and sagging muscles:
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">
Friends say the Austrianborn former strongman has never fully recovered his once-startling physique since an operation to repair faulty heart valves in 1997.

Critics blame the cardiac problems on his admitted use of steroids while bulking up for bodybuilding contests 20 years ago.

Schwarzenegger, who is known to enjoy fine wine and big cigars, denies this - and points out that steroids were new and not illegal when he used them.</div>

I included the denial to be fair, but it seems like there are a lot of such stories. In any case, he doesn't seem to have kept his physique nearly as well as a lot of natural lifters that I remember reading about as a kid.
 
There's only one way to determine your personal genetic potential IMHO, and it's not with a calculator.
You must lift, eat, and sleep consistently until you have spent maybe a year or more without getting any larger or stronger. However, since we work, play, vacation, etc. - virtually NONE of us actually will ever do that. Can anyone here claim to have not missed a meal, workout, or night's sleep for five years? And if you haven't, you need to go get a life!
laugh.gif
 
<div>
(Lifting N Tx @ Aug. 20 2006,13:55)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(scientific muscle @ Aug. 20 2006,11:25)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">genetic potential- the biggest I can get personally with my overall genetic makeup.
</div>
For most of us, add &quot;without using anabolic steroids or other illegal drugs&quot;, and that's what we mean.

The term &quot;genetic potential&quot; may not be a very good one.  I suspect that there is a lot of variation, though I'm not sure how much it is tied to bone size as the calculator assumes.  Based on some of the anecdotal reports I suspect that the calculator is not very accurate at all.

If it was it would be useful.  If you were not growing and not near the potential indicated then you would know that you were probably doing something wrong.  I'd hesitate to draw any conclusions based on that calculator, though.</div>
How do you know that the end to gains is not a function of training or cns exhaustion or the wrong foods or.....?
 
ANother side effect of massive muscle gains with AAS is stretched skin!!!!!!
 
Actually, stretch marks are a side effect of any kind of massive muscular gain. Pretty much all of us get them somewhere. It's not something that only happens with AAS.
 
<div>
(Totentanz @ Aug. 21 2006,08:01)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Actually, stretch marks are a side effect of any kind of massive muscular gain.  Pretty much all of us get them somewhere.  It's not something that only happens with AAS.</div>
I didn´t say it was AAS specific.
 
<div>
(drpierredebs @ Aug. 19 2006,15:35)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Actually someone DEFINE genetic potential?</div>
In the sense of a defintion of terms it can be defined, &quot;the ability or liklihood that the genetic material is capable of producing new genotypic combinations&quot;

Can it quantified? No

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">How do you know that the end to gains is not a function of training or cns exhaustion or the wrong foods or.....? </div>Amen brother
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top