What did @SlayerJonas mean by this?

[illusion]

What does this mean @SlayerJonas The thread in general is good but what on earth were you talking about there Where is the source to this information

Dude's reducing competition, mirin.

Your future if you do a single roid cycle according to SlayerJonas:

@HtnceI @Jgns @cryptt PLEASE give me some clarification here

https://looksmax.org/threads/if-you-are-thinking-about-roiding-read-this-thread.1407345/ <-- Here is the thread

 

[Chance1]

It’s pretty self explanatory

 

[fraudster#1]

View attachment 4821542

first of all, this shit is a myth spreaded by bodybuilders
second of all, yes, steroids do face changes

 

[Sayori]

View attachment 4821542

View attachment 4821544

What does this mean @SlayerJonas The thread in general is good but what on earth were you talking about there Where is the source to this information

Dude's reducing competition, mirin.

Your future if you do a single roid cycle according to SlayerJonas:
View attachment 4821554

@HtnceI @Jgns @cryptt PLEASE give me some clarification here

no way Jonas said this shit

Great to see a legend make mistakes

@SlayerJonas

 

[topology]

legend

 

[Sayori]

send the thread I need to read it

 

[Jgns]

jfl Ive heard that myth before but whatre you guys doing if it turns out you're having a daughter. It is pretty scary icl idk its pretty extreme but that might be the right use case for an abortion jfl tho.

 

[ccwb]

@SlayerJonas i thought ur high iq, kys.

 

[lazyahhnigga]

Idk

 

[HundredManSlayer]

hes not really wrong in any way

 

[cryptt]

Ive read that thread when I was a new user lol it was funny the other parts were good tho

 

[SlayerJonas]

no way Jonas said this shit

Great to see a legend make mistakes

@SlayerJonas

hes not really wrong in any way

It’s pretty self explanatory

X-bearing (female) sperm are much more robust towards testicular oxidative stress and cellular damage and when you're blasting steroids, it naturally results in a disproportionately higher pool of viable X-sperm compared to the more fragile Y-sperm (= higher chance of having a daughter when doing multiple cycles).

During the time I made the thread, the userbase was heavily inclined toward blasting steroids/peptides for completely oblivious reasons like muh bone/height growth, so I naturally had to use some very persuasive methods and exaggerate a few points. The more informative thread is in BOTB and obviously mogs this one.

Sex chromosome-dependent differential viability of human spermatozoa during prolonged incubation - PubMed

This study was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korean government (MEST) (no. NRF-2014R1A2A2A01002706). The authors declare no competing financial interests.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[stonecold trucel]

bro

 

[Volksstaffel]

X-bearing (female) sperm are much more robust towards testicular oxidative stress and cellular damage and when you're blasting steroids, it naturally results in a disproportionately higher pool of viable X-sperm compared to the more fragile Y-sperm (= higher chance of having a daughter when doing multiple cycles).

During the time I made the thread, the userbase was heavily inclined toward blasting steroids/peptides for completely oblivious reasons like muh bone/height growth, so I naturally had to use some very persuasive methods and exaggerate a few points. The more informative thread is in BOTB and obviously mogs this one.

Sex chromosome-dependent differential viability of human spermatozoa during prolonged incubation - PubMed

This study was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korean government (MEST) (no. NRF-2014R1A2A2A01002706). The authors declare no competing financial interests.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

I wouldn't mind a daughter

 

[aids]

X-bearing (female) sperm are much more robust towards testicular oxidative stress and cellular damage and when you're blasting steroids, it naturally results in a disproportionately higher pool of viable X-sperm compared to the more fragile Y-sperm (= higher chance of having a daughter when doing multiple cycles).

During the time I made the thread, the userbase was heavily inclined toward blasting steroids/peptides for completely oblivious reasons like muh bone/height growth, so I naturally had to use some very persuasive methods and exaggerate a few points. The more informative thread is in BOTB and obviously mogs this one.

Sex chromosome-dependent differential viability of human spermatozoa during prolonged incubation - PubMed

This study was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korean government (MEST) (no. NRF-2014R1A2A2A01002706). The authors declare no competing financial interests.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

I cannot fathom that people are incapable of discerning the sarcasm.
True low IQ indicator

 

[Sayori]

X-bearing (female) sperm are much more robust towards testicular oxidative stress and cellular damage and when you're blasting steroids, it naturally results in a disproportionately higher pool of viable X-sperm compared to the more fragile Y-sperm (= higher chance of having a daughter when doing multiple cycles).

During the time I made the thread, the userbase was heavily inclined toward blasting steroids/peptides for completely oblivious reasons like muh bone/height growth, so I naturally had to use some very persuasive methods and exaggerate a few points. The more informative thread is in BOTB and obviously mogs this one.

Sex chromosome-dependent differential viability of human spermatozoa during prolonged incubation - PubMed

This study was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korean government (MEST) (no. NRF-2014R1A2A2A01002706). The authors declare no competing financial interests.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

I don't know if your claim is heavily exaggerated like this one "Also people on roids are only able to have daughters, give up your dream to raise a son already. You'll only have a daughter you'll feed and raise for 16 years, until she gets gangbanged by low iq subhumans." this is just telling me that roiders can only have daughter. However, how is that the case if we look at real examples of body builders having kids your claim isnt supported for example arnold schwarzenegger, Dorian yates, Kai Greene, Lou Ferrigno, Sergio Oliva, Lee haney.

Additionally, this study does not replicate the condition of sperm in the body which makes it less reliable in order to say "Also people on roids are only able to have daughters, give up your dream to raise a son already. You'll only have a daughter you'll feed and raise for 16 years, until she gets gangbanged by low iq subhumans." This claim must be exaggerated as there are real world examples proving contrary to the claim.

In the study itself there was the claim that "it is" difficult to observe the life span difference as shown here "Spermatozoa were cultured in vitro during the treatment period. It is difficult to extrapolate the observed lifespan differences to spermatozoa survival in vivo. The experiments were replicated only three times." This just reinforces the idea that this study isn't reliable enough to make real world conclusion espically when the anecdotal data on body builders show they are in fact having sons.

(will continue this I gotta do sum)

 

[shedontluv-U]

All the mod have such a cool past

 

[Sayori]

@SlayerJonas

I don't know if your claim is heavily exaggerated like this one "Also people on roids are only able to have daughters, give up your dream to raise a son already. You'll only have a daughter you'll feed and raise for 16 years, until she gets gangbanged by low iq subhumans." this is just telling me that roiders can only have daughter. However, how is that the case if we look at real examples of body builders having kids your claim isnt supported for example arnold schwarzenegger, Dorian yates, Kai Greene, Lou Ferrigno, Sergio Oliva, Lee haney.

Additionally, this study does not replicate the condition of sperm in the body which makes it less reliable in order to say "Also people on roids are only able to have daughters, give up your dream to raise a son already. You'll only have a daughter you'll feed and raise for 16 years, until she gets gangbanged by low iq subhumans." This claim must be exaggerated as there are real world examples proving contrary to the claim.

In the study itself there was the claim that "it is" difficult to observe the life span difference as shown here "Spermatozoa were cultured in vitro during the treatment period. It is difficult to extrapolate the observed lifespan differences to spermatozoa survival in vivo. The experiments were replicated only three times." This just reinforces the idea that this study isn't reliable enough to make real world conclusion espically when the anecdotal data on body builders show they are in fact having sons.

(will continue this I gotta do sum)

this isnt some toxic reply okay

I genuinely think that you are inccorect in your claim

people can have different view points

 

[shedontluv-U]

X-bearing (female) sperm are much more robust towards testicular oxidative stress and cellular damage and when you're blasting steroids, it naturally results in a disproportionately higher pool of viable X-sperm compared to the more fragile Y-sperm (= higher chance of having a daughter when doing multiple cycles).

During the time I made the thread, the userbase was heavily inclined toward blasting steroids/peptides for completely oblivious reasons like muh bone/height growth, so I naturally had to use some very persuasive methods and exaggerate a few points. The more informative thread is in BOTB and obviously mogs this one.

Sex chromosome-dependent differential viability of human spermatozoa during prolonged incubation - PubMed

This study was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korean government (MEST) (no. NRF-2014R1A2A2A01002706). The authors declare no competing financial interests.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

He didn't not explain the last part

 

[iblamexyz]

View attachment 4821542

View attachment 4821544

What does this mean @SlayerJonas The thread in general is good but what on earth were you talking about there Where is the source to this information

Dude's reducing competition, mirin.

Your future if you do a single roid cycle according to SlayerJonas:
View attachment 4821554

@HtnceI @Jgns @cryptt PLEASE give me some clarification here

https://looksmax.org/threads/if-you-are-thinking-about-roiding-read-this-thread.1407345/ <-- Here is the thread

only a matter of time untill ur daughter becomes a whore

 

[stevia]

I wouldn't mind a daughter

fr, i wanna have more daughters than sons, make sure my son isnt an incel

 

[got.daim]

View attachment 4821542

View attachment 4821544

What does this mean @SlayerJonas The thread in general is good but what on earth were you talking about there Where is the source to this information

Dude's reducing competition, mirin.

Your future if you do a single roid cycle according to SlayerJonas:
View attachment 4821554

@HtnceI @Jgns @cryptt PLEASE give me some clarification here

https://looksmax.org/threads/if-you-are-thinking-about-roiding-read-this-thread.1407345/ <-- Here is the thread

Yeah I mean this is water, @SlayerJonas is right

Anyways he told me to kill myself one time so I'm still sad about that, I put him on ignore

 

[shedontluv-U]

Yeah I mean this is water, @SlayerJonas is right

Anyways he told me to kill myself one time so I'm still sad about that, I put him on ignore

He ignores me too

I didn't nothing bad to him tho

 

[got.daim]

He ignores me too

I didn't nothing bad to him tho

Top five worst staff members of all time....

Spoiler: Number One

@SlayerJonas

Spoiler: Number Two

@SlayerJonas

Spoiler: Number Three

@SlayerJonas

Spoiler: Number Four

@SlayerJonas

Spoiler: Number Five

@SlayerJonas

 

[shedontluv-U]

Top five worst staff members of all time....

Spoiler: Number One

@SlayerJonas

Spoiler: Number Two

@SlayerJonas

Spoiler: Number Three

@SlayerJonas

Spoiler: Number Four

@SlayerJonas

Spoiler: Number Five

@SlayerJonas

I heavynly don't agree sorry mate

Slayer Jonas is one of the only mods His personality is typical of a Looksmax moderator; even when he bans people, he gives advice like with Panchito

 

[got.daim]

he gives advice like with Panchito

Whattttt

His advice for me to tie a noose

 

[shedontluv-U]

Whattttt

His advice for me to tie a noose

I mean this nigga he is really dedicated you can't tell me the reverse

 

[Jason Voorhees]

X-bearing (female) sperm are much more robust towards testicular oxidative stress and cellular damage and when you're blasting steroids, it naturally results in a disproportionately higher pool of viable X-sperm compared to the more fragile Y-sperm (= higher chance of having a daughter when doing multiple cycles).

During the time I made the thread, the userbase was heavily inclined toward blasting steroids/peptides for completely oblivious reasons like muh bone/height growth, so I naturally had to use some very persuasive methods and exaggerate a few points. The more informative thread is in BOTB and obviously mogs this one.

Sex chromosome-dependent differential viability of human spermatozoa during prolonged incubation - PubMed

This study was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korean government (MEST) (no. NRF-2014R1A2A2A01002706). The authors declare no competing financial interests.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Mod halo helped the aura debt repayment otherwise I doubt you could have ratio'd OP you had already lost the golden window of first 4 replies under a thread to hijack it but forum clout and mod halo saved you mirin @Banned User @Mogs Me

 

[aids]

I don't know if your claim is heavily exaggerated like this one "Also people on roids are only able to have daughters, give up your dream to raise a son already. You'll only have a daughter you'll feed and raise for 16 years, until she gets gangbanged by low iq subhumans.

This claim must be exaggerated as there are real world examples proving contrary to the claim.

In the study itself there was the claim that "it is" difficult to observe the life span difference as shown here "Spermatozoa were cultured in vitro during the treatment period. It is difficult to extrapolate the observed lifespan differences to spermatozoa survival in vivo. The experiments were replicated only three times." This just reinforces the idea that this study isn't reliable enough to make real world conclusion espically when the anecdotal data on body builders show they are in fact having sons.

(will continue this I gotta do sum)

You are arguing with somebody that does not disagree with you I'm caging so hard.

 

[aids]

I don't know if your claim is heavily exaggerated like this one "Also people on roids are only able to have daughters, give up your dream to raise a son already. You'll only have a daughter you'll feed and raise for 16 years, until she gets gangbanged by low iq subhumans." this is just telling me that roiders can only have daughter. However, how is that the case if we look at real examples of body builders having kids your claim isnt supported for example arnold schwarzenegger, Dorian yates, Kai Greene, Lou Ferrigno, Sergio Oliva, Lee haney.

Additionally, this study does not replicate the condition of sperm in the body which makes it less reliable in order to say "Also people on roids are only able to have daughters, give up your dream to raise a son already. You'll only have a daughter you'll feed and raise for 16 years, until she gets gangbanged by low iq subhumans." This claim must be exaggerated as there are real world examples proving contrary to the claim.

In the study itself there was the claim that "it is" difficult to observe the life span difference as shown here "Spermatozoa were cultured in vitro during the treatment period. It is difficult to extrapolate the observed lifespan differences to spermatozoa survival in vivo. The experiments were replicated only three times." This just reinforces the idea that this study isn't reliable enough to make real world conclusion espically when the anecdotal data on body builders show they are in fact having sons.

(will continue this I gotta do sum)

And stop reading just abstracts that anyone can misconstrue to fit their contention.
You didn't even interpret this correctly. The statement is to clarify that the lifespan differences observed in vivo may not be identical to the differences in vitro. This is not challenging what Jonas is saying at all.

https://academic.oup.com/humrep/article/32/6/1183/3739770#85467569

Now, if any of you care to read the shit that people cite. We can read the concluding statement in the discussion. It is not a question of if female sperm are more resistant to oxidative stress, etc., it is a question of why, as the mechanisms are not entirely apparent.
The ratio may be different in vitro but female sperm are going to be more resistant to the aforementioned scenarios with no exception.

You are all arguing over something that was so obviously a hyperbole.
I mean, how can you assume this to be 100% serious:

until she gets gangbanged by low iq subhumans

 

[whatsamaxilla]

send the thread I need to read it

If you are thinking about roiding read this thread.

This is a continuation of my last thread regarding roids. https://looksmax.org/threads/bonesmashing-doesnt-work-roiding-doesnt-change-the-facial-structure.1322927/ Average thread nowadays: I'm seeing more and more users on here that want to roid for the purpose of enhancing their facial...

looksmax.org

 

[nellii]

wdym its true

 

[svarddre]

Thank God I’m not on roids

 

[Somatropin]

Dude's reducing competition, mirin.

First thing that came to mind when I read that thread jfl

 

[Sayori]

And stop reading just abstracts that anyone can misconstrue to fit their contention.
You didn't even interpret this correctly. The statement is to clarify that the lifespan differences observed in vivo may not be identical to the differences in vitro. This is not challenging what Jonas is saying at all.

https://academic.oup.com/humrep/article/32/6/1183/3739770#85467569

Now, if any of you care to read the shit that people cite. We can read the concluding statement in the discussion. It is not a question of if female sperm are more resistant to oxidative stress, etc., it is a question of why, as the mechanisms are not entirely apparent.
The ratio may be different in vitro but female sperm are going to be more resistant to the aforementioned scenarios with no exception.

You are all arguing over something that was so obviously a hyperbole.
I mean, how can you assume this to be 100% serious:

Okie noted

I did question if he was exaggerating just because I wasn't unsure

that's the reason I didn't attack Jonas