OT question: Why is protein and creatine considered natural, but Test/slin/GH is not?

[Medic08]

I'm sure I'm beating a dead horse here, but I think it's a logical question. The point I'm trying to make is this.... It's no secret that your body naturally produces protein/amino acids and creatine. Or that you get them from food sources and/or supplements. Its also no secret that your body also produces insulin, testosterone, and growth hormone. So my question is why is it considered unnatural to take exogenous testosterone, insulin, and growth hormone, but its considered natural to take protein shakes, carb drinks, creatine supplements, and BCAA's? The human body either produces all the above or gets it from food source so I really don't see how you can clasify one as natural and the other as unnatural. Seems pretty hypocritical, IMO. Either way you're elevating any of the levels I listed into higher levels than the body naturally produces.

Also, if you've a health condition that causes you to take TRT prescribed from a physician, does this mean that you're not allowed to compete in natural bodybuilding competitions? Or does this mean that you're not considered a natural bodybuilder? And I'm referring to legit hypogonadism caused by a genetic condition, not caused by AAS use/abuse.

I know that this is a purely subjective discussion, but I'm curious what everyone's thoughts are on the topic.

 

[I R BABOON]

I would think that Test/slin/GH would be considered "unnatural" because their effects are much more dramatic and can take you past your bodies "natural" genetic potential. Whereas supplementing with protein and creatine, while they may help to improve ones physique substantially, will only help an individual to maximize their inherit genetic potential. Or something like that...

 

[Medic08]

So in your opinion the results that supplements give you is the difference in natty vs unnatty? I can see what you're saying, but some guys can gain a great deal of mass just by sticking to a strict diet and training program. For example, when I first started training I put on a solid 30lbs in 3-4 months. Obviously I didn't look like a mass monster, but my friends questioned whether or not I was using gear bc I gained weight so fast and I wasn't using gear at the time. My body was obviously just starving for food and training and on I gave my body what it needed I blew up. I think the same thing happens to everyone when they first start training though.

 

[thatbloke]

Simple testosterone n gh are performance enhancers. There effective enough to give a unfair advantage n be banned.

Protein is a basic nutrient n there not a performance enhancement.

Creatine could be argued as a performance enhancement but I guess it hasn't been found to make a significant effect to have it banned.

 

[Medic08]

Simple testosterone n gh are performance enhancers. There effective enough to give a unfair advantage n be banned.

Protein is a basic nutrient n there not a performance enhancement.

Creatine could be argued as a performance enhancement but I guess it hasn't been found to make a significant effect to have it banned.

I agree with you, but your statement about creatine is basically my point. I think creatine is a pretty powerful product considering what it is. So why is it allowed? I'm just asking rhetorically, not looking for you to answer again.

Is creatine allowed in natty bodybuilding competitions at a national level?

 

[one8seven]

Things like creatine and amino acids are in our food that we consume daily which I think puts this in the natural category, theres no test, tren and gh in the food your eating

 

[ALLEX]

Creatine supplements are not natural, since they are not extracted from a natural source, but manufactured from 2 chemicals, sarcosine and cyanamide.

GH, insulin and testosterone are also manufactured.

Protein is extracted from milk, soy, or whatever, so it's natural.

Cadaver HGH is natural.

 

[sammy555]

Things like creatine and amino acids are in our food that we consume daily which I think puts this in the natural category, theres no test, tren and gh in the food your eating

I think this is probably about right. I b think creatine may be banned in certain sports, just something I remember reading somewhere

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk 2

 

[texastea]

The body is far more efficient in excreting/metabolizing excess protein and creatine. Further, super doses yield little, if any, benefit. In other words, there is no such thing as a "non-natural" protein level. Sounds a bit circular, but still.


Sent from my iPhone, slacking at work, using Tapatalk

 

[Medic08]

Creatine supplements are not natural, since they are not extracted from a natural source, but manufactured from 2 chemicals, sarcosine and cyanamide.

GH, insulin and testosterone are also manufactured.

Protein is extracted from milk, soy, or whatever, so it's natural.

Cadaver HGH is natural.

In bold is the point I'm trying to make. Why are natural athletes allowed to consume it if its just as unnatural as the hormones that we take?

 

[ALLEX]

In bold is the point I'm trying to make. Why are natural athletes allowed to consume it if its just as unnatural as the hormones that we take?

"Natural athlete" is simply a name they came up with but it doesn't actually mean they gotta be totally natural.

Every sports organization has a list of banned substances that can't be in your system for you to receive the title of "natural" or "able to compete".

If you think about it, an aspirin or the fluoride/chlorine in the water you drink makes everyone un-natural.

 

[Medic08]

Things like creatine and amino acids are in our food that we consume daily which I think puts this in the natural category, theres no test, tren and gh in the food your eating

I never said Tren was natural lol. But our foods are loaded with steroids and hormones so your wrong by saying that. The cows that are at slaughter houses are pumped full of hormones so they can make them as big as possible leading to more meat to sell to buyers. Unless it specifically says "no hormones" on the packaging then the meat we eat have more exogenous hormones in them than we do.

What I'm saying is testosterone and growth hormone are just as natural as protein and amino acids. Obviously taking large amounts of any of the above whether it be testosterone or protein is simply not natural. I'm not saying that 600mg is equal to 600G of a protein shake. I'm just saying that anything out of the bodies norm should be considered unnatural if we're putting a label on it. It's really just a catch 22 IMO.

 

[Medic08]

"Natural athlete" is simply a name they came up with but it doesn't actually mean they gotta be totally natural.

Every sports organization has a list of banned substances that can't be in your system for you to receive the title of "natural" or "able to compete".

If you think about it, an aspirin or the fluoride/chlorine in the water you drink makes everyone un-natural.

I agree with you and everything you're saying. I just don't know why people make such a big deal out of exogenous test and GH when in all reality no one is really natural.

 

[Swifto]

Ask the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA).

Be good to read their answer actually.

 

[I R BABOON]

So in your opinion the results that supplements give you is the difference in natty vs unnatty? I can see what you're saying, but some guys can gain a great deal of mass just by sticking to a strict diet and training program. For example, when I first started training I put on a solid 30lbs in 3-4 months. Obviously I didn't look like a mass monster, but my friends questioned whether or not I was using gear bc I gained weight so fast and I wasn't using gear at the time. My body was obviously just starving for food and training and on I gave my body what it needed I blew up. I think the same thing happens to everyone when they first start training though.

Thats my point, you blew up but only to what your body can naturally hold onto while you are engaging in resistance training. When you take roids etc... the body goes beyond what it naturally can hold onto so that when you continue your resistance training after coming off a roid cycle you will lose some mass and strength.

 

[ALLEX]

I agree with you and everything you're saying. I just don't know why people make such a big deal out of exogenous test and GH when in all reality no one is really natural.

You are seeing this wrong and getting caught on the word "natural".

There are allowed substances and banned substances. That's about it...

Not every banned substance enhances performance, not every allowed substance doesn't.

Natural occurring caffeine enhances performance big time, but I believe it's been unbanned even in the Olympics. OTOH, natural occurring ephedrine is banned everywhere.

The criteria is extremely complex and involves doctors, managers, international federations and vary by competition, country, sport and everything else.

 

[JR32]

Food vs Hormones

 

[Medic08]

You are seeing this wrong and getting caught on the word "natural".

There are allowed substances and banned substances. That's about it...

Not every banned substance enhances performance, not every allowed substance doesn't.

Natural occurring caffeine enhances performance big time, but I believe it's been unbanned even in the Olympics. OTOH, natural occurring ephedrine is banned everywhere.

The criteria is extremely complex and involves doctors, managers, international federations and vary by competition, country, sport and everything else.

Haha I guess you're missing that you and I are on the same page. You're just being literal and using specific criteria. I'm speaking from more of a moral point of view. Yes, I know what is banned in the MLB, NFL, or UFC. I'm just saying that I don't think one substance should be allowed when another substance that is just as unnatural is not allowed.

My belief is that certain banned substances such as testosterone is not going to make up for lack of athletic ability in certain sports.

Take baseball for example.... Hank Aaron was not a big guy when he played the game, but look at what he did. This average looking guy set the HR record and it held for several decades. How did he do it? God given talent, skill, and athletic ability. Then you've got Barry Bonds who as we all know broke Hanks record. He is the polar opposite of Aaron as far as size goes. We also know that he was highly accused of using HGH and steroids which is most likely the case. This brings up the question, did he hit all those home runs solely bc he was using PED's or would he have broke the record if he was the same size as Hank? Obviously there's no way to know bc you can't prove it, but my point is that no amount of drugs will EVER make up for pure athletic ability.

Now, certain sports such as MMA I think PED's do give you an advantage bc you're directly using strength to beat your opponents. With that being said, I still think PED's won't make up for lack of athletic ability. Most guys that have been busted for AAS in MMA are not the best guys in the sport. Take Royce Gracie for example. Yes he was busted for AAS late in his career, but when he won the first UFC tournaments he beat those guys bc of pure skill. Who knows if he was using AAS back in the day, but I really don't think it would have made a difference bc he clearly didn't beat guys bc he was bigger or stronger. He beat them bc he was just that much better than everyone.

People give PED's WAY too much credit in my opinion. As I said before, look at the guys that have been busted for banned substances in MMA. Very few of them have held a belt and when they do get busted, its usually after a defeat. Allistar Overreem is a good example. He's obviously juiced up, but he still gets beat by quite a few guys that are thought to be "clean."

Now, in sports such as bodybuilding and power lifting there is a clear advantage in using PED's. With out the use of PED's in these two sports there would be a major difference in results.

Do you see what I'm getting at now?

 

[ALLEX]

I'm just saying that I don't think one substance should be allowed when another substance that is just as unnatural is not allowed.

Substances are not banned based on how natural or unnatural they are, they are banned based on how enhancing they are. Athletes have lost medals for eating poppy seeds.

By doing this, they try to make competition more even, or athletes with more economic power would always have an unfair advantage, which happens anyway.

Do you have any idea of how faster and longer a runner can go with some EPO or how stronger the grip of a judoka can get with some halo and cheque drops?

 

[Medic08]

Do you have any idea of how faster and longer a runner can go with some EPO or how stronger the grip of a judoka can get with some halo and cheque drops?

Do I have an idea? Yeah, I have an idea, especially with EPO, but do I know how beneficial it is? No I don't. Like I said, certain sports benefit from PED's more than others. Just like I pointed out in baseball. You've got an average looking guy hitting 715 HR's bc of pure skill, not bc he's loading up on hormones.

I still think you're failing to see that you and I seem to be on the same page, but you keep making points that I'm also making.

Do you feel that PED's override pure athletic ability?