GSP HGH gut?

[MescalineDreams]

Is it that time of the month again



You know that time when people realize how great the real goat was




Then try to accuse him of some bullshit



You found a few pics of him breathing heavy


I can find 1375 of him looking lean and trim

GSP NUTHUGGERS

 

[MescalineDreams]

Show me the scientific journals that point to HGH use and a stomach distension...

Bro science at it's best. There are a tonne of different variables that can combine to create such effects.

care to list them? GH gut is WIDELY known and understood In the bodybuilding/ ped community for decades. Don't be a fool

 

[politozx7r]

GSP NUTHUGGERS

Lol don't hate

It's warm hanging from his nuts

 

[The Great Macsby]

care to list them? GH gut is WIDELY known and understood In the bodybuilding/ ped community for decades. Don't be a fool

that body building community...



Where they do the real science. Get the fook out here and stop wasting my time by quoting me minnow.

 

[MescalineDreams]

GSP did WADA testing which he paid out of his own pocket.

I don't think he was on steroids but nothing is 100% certain I guess.

as if that whole situation wasn't sketchy as fuck.

If you don't question anything that happened during that whole testing fiasco / vada you are a sheep.

 

[MescalineDreams]

that body building community...



Where they do the real science. Get the fook out here and stop wasting my time by quoting me minnow.

It Is anecdotal evidence but still relevant to the discussion. Not everything Is published In peer reviewed journals. The scientific community can be a political clusterfuck at times. A lot of real shit doesn't always get the time of day.

 

[MescalineDreams]

that body building community...



Where they do the real science. Get the fook out here and stop wasting my time by quoting me minnow.

if you think science Is always the unadulturated nor tampered with holy grail, you should read this.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/13/well/eat/how-the-sugar-industry-shifted-blame-to-fat.html?_r=0

 

[The Great Macsby]

It Is anecdotal evidence but still relevant to the discussion. Not everything Is published In peer reviewed journals. The scientific community can be a political clusterfuck at times. A lot of real shit doesn't always get the time of day.

of course. The 'file-drawer effect'

The reality is it has been discussed for decades now. If it was a real thing it would have been tested. Obviously it can be rationalized, hence why nothing has been published about it.

 

[The Great Macsby]

if you think science Is always the unadulturated nor tampered with holy grail, you should read this.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/13/well/eat/how-the-sugar-industry-shifted-blame-to-fat.html?_r=0

they paid some scientists...not the world...

I am very familiar with 'Nestle' - she will do anything she can to get some publicity and has been slamming sugar for years to boost her own agenda.

No one is denying come researchers lack the correct moral fibre. But you are shifting the argument.

 

[mcdowels]

I'm willing to be TS has a gut, but not an HGH gut

 

[Toco]

I've got another eye test for you guys! Have any of these UFC fighter ever taken PEDS in their lifetime? I know one of them was suspended multiple times but that wasn't for PEDs, right? They're clear as mud, as we say in French. Everybody else is on steroids but those two are angels of conformism and apostle of strict following of rules.

Right guys? Are you scared, homies? 2000$ blunt, that's what I call high altitude training!

is this a salty GSP fan?

 

[Metal_Daze]

is this a salty GSP fan?

Only salty peoples here are the ones rustled by facts.

Facts are facts, whether you like them or not. Only The Don can deny a fact and my facts are still valid: he has not signed any decree against them. So I'll leave you with another RUSH song since this thread is about GSP:

Just the facts.
Gonna kick some gluteus max.
It’s a parallax — you dig?
You move around
The small gets big. It’s a rig
It’s action — reaction —
Random interaction.
So who’s afraid
Of a little abstraction?
Can’t get no satisfaction
From the facts?

 

[Metal_Daze]

if you think science Is always the unadulturated nor tampered with holy grail, you should read this.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/13/well/eat/how-the-sugar-industry-shifted-blame-to-fat.html?_r=0

Weren't you the guy complaining about anecdotal evidence? This could not be more anecdotal: one example of what scientists "used to do in the sixties" with no solid proof, few facts and frankly, not a very serious article. They keep mentioning a non-referred article and they go very fast over hard data. Sure the NY times can be legit at times but that article smells. They even finish the article with the word "badly", I was already bracing for the word "bigly"...

I just want to pick one example: the article is valid but you'll see what I mean:

"(..) more recent reports show that the food industry has continued to influence nutrition science."

No shit Sherlock! Next, they will reveal that cigarette producers lied to us and that beer can harm your liver. When you write a serious article, you never need to mention that. Just that sentence tells me it was toned down for newspaper readers. Not toned down to the lowest denominator but toned down nonetheless. I'm obviously pushing it but I consider your evidence as very anecdotal. Maybe you'll take the time to look in the mirror before accusing others of doing what you're blatantly doing.

No harm done, I found it funny that's all.

 

[Snowfist]

I have something similar. It's just different builds...I have flared ribs.

 

[MescalineDreams]

Weren't you the guy complaining about anecdotal evidence? This could not be more anecdotal: one example of what scientists "used to do in the sixties" with no solid proof, few facts and frankly, not a very serious article. They keep mentioning a non-referred article and they go very fast over hard data. Sure the NY times can be legit at times but that article smells. They even finish the article with the word "badly", I was already bracing for the word "bigly"...

I just want to pick one example: the article is valid but you'll see what I mean:

"(..) more recent reports show that the food industry has continued to influence nutrition science."

No shit Sherlock! Next, they will reveal that cigarette producers lied to us and that beer can harm your liver. When you write a serious article, you never need to mention that. Just that sentence tells me it was toned down for newspaper readers. Not toned down to the lowest denominator but toned down nonetheless. I'm obviously pushing it but I consider your evidence as very anecdotal. Maybe you'll take the time to look in the mirror before accusing others of doing what you're blatantly doing.

No harm done, I found it funny that's all.

I'd suggest looking more deeply into the topic. The NYT article simply represented a point when the truth of sugar and saturated fat hit the mainstream.

 

[MuayThaiBX]

Any opinions on whether GSP has ever used PEDs is pure speculation. Nobody knows for sure but GSP himself or anybody he allowed to know if he did. He may or may not have but there is no way to prove or disprove. This goes for all fighters that have never pissed hot - especially before the USADA era began.

 

[Metal_Daze]

I'd suggest looking more deeply into the topic. The NYT article simply represented a point when the truth of sugar and saturated fat hit the mainstream.

I certainly will! The article did plant a seed of "further examination needed" and that's the most important thing. If the article makes me look at more data and learn new things, then the result is what they were expecting. I guess it was a more serious article than I thought at first.

Or you're just a damn good salesman!

 

[Metal_Daze]

Any opinions on whether GSP has ever used PEDs is pure speculation. Nobody knows for sure but GSP himself or anybody he allowed to know if he did. He may or may not have but there is no way to prove or disprove. This goes for all fighters that have never pissed hot - especially before the USADA era began.

This is very rational and concise. It will not stop haters from hating but it's a good start. Let me guess: you're a GSP fan but you exercise some restrain to avoid getting tagged with bias accusations.

Am I far from the truth? Don't be shy!

 

[Metal_Daze]

As for myself, I think everybody knows by now that anytime Tony is offline, I'm on duty:

 

[MescalineDreams]

I certainly will! The article did plant a seed of "further examination needed" and that's the most important thing. If the article makes me look at more data and learn new things, then the result is what they were expecting. I guess it was a more serious article than I thought at first.

Or you're just a damn good salesman!

The truth of how the sugar industry manipulated scientific research and directed the path of nutrition has been known for many years.

There are countless examples of data doctoring throughout the last few decades and It's still going on.

The article definitely plants the seed for the uninitiated.