D
Deleted member 20704
Doesn't vibe with humans much anymore.
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2022
- Posts
- 1,484
- Reputation
- 2,384
A guy on the Ray Peat forum said he gymcelled and barely improved strength, yet when he hopped on test he was getting stronger even with no working out ... Stronger than he could ever get as a natty while just sitting on his ass and rubbing DMSO & test base on himself.
It seems for most exercising only SOMEWHAT increases strength, whereas for some rare specimens maybe they can go far as a natty.
But ultimately I don't think exercise helps strength nearly as much as people want to believe it does ... Do not quote powerlifters, weightlifters, etc. as most top-level use gear & at that point it's possibly silly to argue the semantics of strength on 500 mg test + tren/etc.
So it's moot ... Comparing strength variances among users on gear is like comparing bank notes among millionaires ... Those people often are above us natties. The point is I think strength can't increase far if some hormones or health or some other major processes aren't changed ... It's the reason some stay weak lifelong, I think.
I don't know if it's only test, but DHT, thyroid, nervous sytem adaptation, diet, and probably a million other factors ... Genes play a role too I guess, or epigenetics. You just know strength doesn't always come down to who works out harder cuz you can get trenboys who work out poorly & are strong AF & dedicated natties who're wimpy.
If you workout to INCREASE strength without roids then at least SERIOUSLY consider biomechanics, diet, health, transmitters, etc. & what influences hormones & such. Since muscle is mostly water I'd say water mass increases strength to a degree as it just fuels the muscles AKA why test is considered a "wet compound" rather than "dry."
Drying compounds rarely increase muscle or strength as much as the wetter ones, which tend to "blow you up" with muscle and have more dramatic effects, good & bad. So test is RISKIER but could have bigger rewards for some, while dry compounds offer less extremes.
It seems for most exercising only SOMEWHAT increases strength, whereas for some rare specimens maybe they can go far as a natty.
But ultimately I don't think exercise helps strength nearly as much as people want to believe it does ... Do not quote powerlifters, weightlifters, etc. as most top-level use gear & at that point it's possibly silly to argue the semantics of strength on 500 mg test + tren/etc.
So it's moot ... Comparing strength variances among users on gear is like comparing bank notes among millionaires ... Those people often are above us natties. The point is I think strength can't increase far if some hormones or health or some other major processes aren't changed ... It's the reason some stay weak lifelong, I think.
I don't know if it's only test, but DHT, thyroid, nervous sytem adaptation, diet, and probably a million other factors ... Genes play a role too I guess, or epigenetics. You just know strength doesn't always come down to who works out harder cuz you can get trenboys who work out poorly & are strong AF & dedicated natties who're wimpy.
If you workout to INCREASE strength without roids then at least SERIOUSLY consider biomechanics, diet, health, transmitters, etc. & what influences hormones & such. Since muscle is mostly water I'd say water mass increases strength to a degree as it just fuels the muscles AKA why test is considered a "wet compound" rather than "dry."
Drying compounds rarely increase muscle or strength as much as the wetter ones, which tend to "blow you up" with muscle and have more dramatic effects, good & bad. So test is RISKIER but could have bigger rewards for some, while dry compounds offer less extremes.
Last edited:
