Hi /fit/,
I'm having an argument with my gf and some of my friends about what kind of physiques are achievable natty.
Some say Brad Pitt in Fight Club is absolutely 'roided up' because of his 'inhuman abs'. Others say pro bodybuilders are mostly natty. Certainly both statements are bullshit.
I'm studying biology but I have absolutely no clue about the maximum muscle mass a human can achieve without hormone supplements.
At the moment Scooby would be my best guess.
What's you opinion on this, anon?
Scooby isn't natty.
>>35560974
There was a study of the upper limit of natty with fat free mass, Google it.
>>35561199
He takes it for his low test through his doctor though.
>>35561245
>He takes it for his low test through his doctor though.
Exactly, so he's not natty. I don't think he goes crazy with roids, but the little bit of artificial test he does take makes a big difference.
>>35560974
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-he7UZXfPH0
This video can give you an idea.
There's big as fuck guys that are natty and small dyels that are roided the fuck up. Roids =/= size.
>>35561274
He is old as fuck and takes it to reach the standard level of test for a man his age. He is literally taking test for what it is indicated. Similar to people with hypothyroidism taking synthroid but fatties cutting taking it with normal thyroids and to excess. He is not "natty" but he is not roiding either. He is an example of natty potential.
>>35561417
So I'm between skinny and ottermode with fairly low bodyfat (18yo, 160lbs, 13%, 5'10"). I look like I don't lift, and I have only just started lifting to stay competitive in rugby. He's saying if I gain 30lbs and don't get fat then I'm on the level of the top 1% of genetics and If I gain, say 35-40 lbs of muscle and lose 5-10 lbs of fat then I am almost definitely on steroids. I'm finding this hard to believe.
>>35561274
TRT only brings someone to a normal level of testosterone.
>>35560974
Maybe the most genetically gifted 0.01% of people could get a body similar to Zyzz with perfect training and diet over a long period of time
![Laocoon_Pio-Clementino_Inv1059-1064-1067[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/BkGMsAd.jpg "Laocoon_Pio-Clementino_Inv1059-1064-1067[1].jpg")
Greek sculpture is your best reference for the pinnacle of natty physique.
>>35562604
I think jeff cavaliere is an excellent example of a realistic, moderate, aesthetic and able natural muscular physique.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzjSbsPm85k
scott herman too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzjSbsPm85k
note: not saying they're the limit, more so the ideal
>>35562666
accidentally copied the same link twice, here's scott herman.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPJAdy8Ah5M
>>35562455
>>35561600
STILL. NOT. NATTY.
i dont browse /fit/ what is natty?
>>35563905
people who are big but can still pull a nataly ( natty) shes a famous cross dressing body builder.
>>35560974
Look i was lifting for about 3 months maybe even less here and my abs were close to Brad Pitt , it's laughable to suggest he was roided up ( well it could be some cutting agent , or eve steroids but that look is easily EASILY achievable by every DYEL guy in 4/5 months tops)
>>35563980
how? just intense cutting? HIIT?
>>35563945
wait im not understanding. people who are bulked but can still look like a crossdresser? or is the term used differently
Am I natty when I am a diabetic on Insulin?
I mean that is clearly an "advantage" I have
>>35563998
I was retarded noob back then routine wise.
Did full body work-outs five days a week.
Pretty sure i could have been bigger if i cut it back to 3 days a week .
I did leangains 16/8 for 6 days a week , but dedicated 40 hours fast one time a week.
>>35564025
yes? Look at this beatuy
>>35563980
I think the cutting agent is more likely, I'd be surprised to see a natural that size and that lean.
It's also worth bearing in mind he put on mass as the shoot went on, so he's larger at the end than he is in the famous image which is towards the start of the film.
>Scoobert
>natty
top laff m8s
>>35561648
>gaining 35-40 lbs of muscle
are you alright in your head mate?
lmfao .. man there are so many DYEL retards on this board who simply have no idea how much muscle they can actually put on
a normal human being maybe puts on 10 lbs of muscle in his first year of liftingg
cut that in half for then 2nd year and again for the 3 year
for example
HodgeTwins gained 25 lbs of muscle over 4-5 years.
>>35564069
god that awful
thanks for telling me of this evil anon
>>35562604
if they are natty's why are their dicks so small?
>>35564110
>hodges
implying they didn't have 10-20lbs of muscle on the average skeleton when they started.
>>35564025
natty = natural
like not roiding
>>35564380
oh thats simpler, thanks
>Brad Pitt in Fight Club is absolutely 'roided up' because of his 'inhuman abs'
Normies really think this?
What else do normies think about lifting? Somebody tell me, since I don't talk to them much myself
im 5'8 with pretty damn average lifting genes
how big could i get at 10% completely naturally without going super autistic over it and tracking every single macro for a decade to get that extra 5 pounds?
>>35564583
find out
>>35561245
>There was a study of the upper limit of natty with fat free mass
there are a couple naturals on this board that are above the "limits" based on ffmi.
Paul chek is definitely natty. I hope to look this good at 50
>>35560974
Scooby is what a natty would look like after 30 years of lifting IF testosterone production didn't start to decrease once you reach 30 years old. He is on test replacement, so he isn't natty, and has too big pecs to be considered natty, probably his FFMI is above 25, don't really know
For my experience I'd say natty limit of muscle size is somewhere around the Hodgetwins if you've got above average potential, they also have a very aesthetic build too. I'm not saying they are natty, i don't give a fuck if they are
>>35561648
You can't gain 30 lbs of muscle without increasing your bf%. Understand this please.
30 lbs of muscle is quite a lot, and would take you quite a few years with good nutrition and comitment. Two identical twins same height, same bf% and one with 30 more lbs of muscle would loke very very very diferent.
I'm also quite sure you're underestimating your bf% tho
>>35562455
>>35561600
>>35561245
>>35560974
that's why scooby's body is above natty, cause he's been working out for decades with the test levels of a young adult. It's like having a 25 yo working out for 30 years in the hyperbolic time chamber from dragon ball. No one can achieve his body without extra test, cause it would take you 30 years but your decreased test levels wouldn't let gain all that muscle
>>35560974
This spaniard is what i'd say natty limit on a lean guy, he's been training since early childhood anf is a fucking manlet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5SYG9eMy9Q
>>35563905
Natty=natural
Means that doesn't use steroids or some shit like that to gain muscle mass
Read: http://www.doxtor.fit/2016/01/the-three-types-of-weight-lifters.html
>article mentions brad pitt's physique and how it's 100% natty, as well as his workouts and diet
>roided up abs
No such thing. If anything, people on roids have harder times getting abs than those not on roids
>>35564769
"naturals"
>>35565003
>the test levels of a young adult. I
there's not necessarily a difference in test levels between young men and mature men.
once you take into account - weight gain, marriage, children, stress, lack of exercise etc. then what you see as someone ages isn't inevitable.
there was a village somewhere in eastern europe or russia or something (I haven't been able to find it since I read about it) where they tested the levels of all the men and the older men had the same levels, there was no age-related decline. One speculation was that it was their "hibernation"-type behaviour in winter which took some of the pressure off - but there have been studies done of healthy older men in the US and they don't have lower test levels either. It's stupid to confine someone like Scooby to the test levels of the average, overweight, married, stressed, sedentary American and think that's all he should have because it's "normal".
>>35565188
And? That changes nothing m8, unless OP lives on that fucking romanian town.
>>35565204
OP's not asking if HE can reach that, he's asking what's the maximum that can be achieved natty, so these anomalies however uncommon need to be taken into consideration
>>35565144
This article also claims that Arnold Schwarzenegger was natty.
>>35565374
Glad i didn't waste my time
>>35565204
He doesn't need to live in spme gypsy wonderland to have normal test levels.
He just needs to
>be single
>be happy
>live comfortably
>eat well
>exercise in good routines
*by being single you scratch off 70% of the issue
>>35566562
>by being single you scratch off 70% of the issue
but at what cost?
>>35565003
>>35561274
Wanted to emphasize how it was healthy. He's not pushing his test limits above healthy levels through his doctor, which roiders do.
Maintaining an average test is pretty different from pushing it up beyond natural human limits. He's basically a regular guy. He wouldn't take test if he didn't suffer from low test at his age.
>>35564059
Why the 40 hours fast? Care to elaborate?
>>35560974
A lot of the physiques you see out there are attainable natty, but most people will never reach them.
I'm talking about Captain America, Brad Pitt from Fight Club, Zyzz, Scoobs, and physiques that you see in current body threads that are impressive- these are attainable natty, but the likelihood that they were attained naturally is up to question.
A lot of people who use steroids are under or at the threshold of natural muscle, which is a lean body mass index of around 25-26 at 10% body fat.
A lot of people use steroids just to build a physique in their first 3 months lifting that would take them 3 years to build naturally.
A lot of people use low doses steroids to help them stay lean year round without having to diet and suffer the effects of low testosterone and improper hormonal balance.
If you go into a gym, chances are more than half of the big guys are either on gear or have used it in the past.
There are studies showing that 10% of high schoolers have used some form of performance enhancing drug and even ones that show that something like 8-10% of high school athletes alone have experimented with human growth hormone.
Now imagine how many people aren't admitting in these surveys to their drug experimentation.
>>35569051
Fundamentally, if you are really concerned with body recomposition, that ultimately translates into burning adipose FFAs to reveal your underlying musculature. In terms of accelerated FFA oxidation, there is no substitute for a multi day fast. The first day of any fast serves to draw down liver glycogen stores. The subsequent days are spent oxidizing FFAs for energy. I would not advise going beyond 40 - 48 hours as you risk entering into the proteolytic zone.
My personal experience, as well as that of others that have done this, is that the second day of a fast is generally easier than the first. I speculate that this is because insulin levels consistently drop as the fast progresses, and accordingly, perceived hunger drops as well. If you have habituated yourself to eating one meal per day in the evening, then a 40 hour fast actually entails merely skipping your one meal. For my part, I do this on a weekly basis.
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread29011.html
>>35564146
Hm.
[spoiler] Fun fact for anybody for Likes history lessons! Did you know that many cultures at this time period believed that a small, feminine penis was beautiful, pure, and attractive, unlike a big masculine one which they perceived to be barbaric? And barbarism was a baaad thing back then. Kind of like what being a terrorist/ISIS is now![/spoiler]
>>35560974
The answer is: Depends. Scott Herman is natty, so was Nick Wright. If you're lucky you can be natty and look like Scott Herman. If you're not you can work, eat and sleep perfectly but be like Nick Wright's pre roids form. You can see the effects of roids on his current form btw.
Brad Pitt's body in Fight Club is achievable natty. But Brad is not natty, no Hollywood actor is, as their schedule is so demanding and inconsistent they would be fucked without roids as they can't get the "stress free" nor "complete rest" parts of the recovery not to mention their age.
>>35561245
>low test
If he is on TRT like he says he has a higher test level than a 20 year old man
>>35565144
>people on roids have harder times getting abs than those not on roids
yeah ok buddy
I doubt goob is natural
>>35570202
When did Nick Wright supposedly go on roids? When he cut recently? He didn't get THAT lean, and he lost strength and size...
>>35565156
They are natural, trip on blaha.
>>35565188
Total test doesn't change much with age, you're right.
But free test declines in older men due to an increase in Sex Hormone Binding Globulin, SHBG, as this binds to the testosterone preventing it from being utilized to its full potential.
You can have high total testosterone but your free test can be low, giving you symptoms of low test.
