Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well Stallone said anyone over 40 should consider HGH...now if you look at him he looks about 30 in that picture, he could have had some plastic surgery, and of course he trains, but Arnold actually looks like a real man his age that is in great shape. I never have seen anyone in their mid 60s with the body of someone in their 30s or even 20s, it looks like some cosmetic work was done, on top of all his training.
Well Stallone said anyone over 40 should consider HGH...now if you look at him he looks about 30 in that picture, he could have had some plastic surgery, and of course he trains, but Arnold actually looks like a real man his age that is in great shape. I never have seen anyone in their mid 60s with the body of someone in their 30s or even 20s, it looks like some cosmetic work was done, on top of all his training.
Try going to Stallone's website at the link I provided, and watch his fitness videos. That guy trains hard.
How exactly do you do plastic surgery on abdominals, obliques, or any muscles for that matter?
Stallone simply eats right and trains hard. That's why he looks great at 65.
And Stallone does have the body of a 30 year old ... and not just any 30 year old ... but a 30 year old who is in AWESOME condition!
I'll take Stallone's body over Arnold's any day of the week.
Arnold now has a huge gut and droopy chest. He needs to get back to the gym.
Well Stallone said anyone over 40 should consider HGH...now if you look at him he looks about 30 in that picture, he could have had some plastic surgery, and of course he trains, but Arnold actually looks like a real man his age that is in great shape. I never have seen anyone in their mid 60s with the body of someone in their 30s or even 20s, it looks like some cosmetic work was done, on top of all his training.
Both of them show a daily commitment exercise and good nutrition. The time they put into the activity is not what the average person would be able to do.
But it can be done.
Both of them altered their diet and exercise after being overweight.
I don't think you understand what amino acids are..
Please tell me your secret to being able to read minds! I want to learn at your feet, oh great master of the mind!
And I do understand what amino acids are, thank you very much. I was just throwing out a bunch of random words and word fragments often associated with dietary supplements meant to increase powerlifting ability, recovery, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by villageidiot1
I've tried most of the stuff on the market over the years and it does very little except give you lots of gas.
Yeah, something like that. I used Power Bars when I lifted for strength back in the day and I always felt like they gave me a bit of a boost... but that could've just been psychological.
Some people are meant to lift lots of weight, some are not. I had a 16-year-old student who could bench-press almost 400 pounds. He was one of those short guys with arms the size of tree trunks. He said that his first time on the bench, ever, he was 14 years old and he benched 210 pounds. My first time on the bench, ever, I was 14 years old and I benched 100 pounds. Some people are built for it. I'm not. I got up to benching 150% of my body weight and I doubt I will ever reach that again because any time I've come close in the recent past, I've gotten tendonitis.
You can never upgrade your bones, tendons, etc... so it's entirely understandable why some people get really messed up after years of hardcore weightlifting.
Soft tissue and bones get stronger from weightlifting (Yes, even internationally ranked weightlifters... olympic weightlifting, if I confuse you).
On internationally ranked weightlifters:
Quote:
was studied in 40 nationally or internationally ranked male weight lifters.....The BMD was significantly higher in the weight lifters compared with the controls
BMD increased significantly above baseline at the lumbar spine for the exercise group at 5 months (2.8%), 12 months (2.3%), and 18 months (1.9%) as compared with controls.
Did I ever claim he didn't still train hard? Steroids and HGH don't magically make you huge and ripped without training.
Look at a competitive "natural" bodybuilder and a competitive open class bodybuilder. HUGE differences there, right? Do you think the natural bodybuilder doesn't train as hard as the guy on gear and *that's* why he's so much smaller?
Yeah, something like that. I used Power Bars when I lifted for strength back in the day and I always felt like they gave me a bit of a boost... but that could've just been psychological.
With the assertion that it's possible to get "incredibly strong" with calisthenics and the mention of discovering "advanced calisthenics," it sounds as if Del Boy may be talking about workouts sometimes called old-school calisthenics or prison calisthenics. These are the exercises where you do variations on standard calisthenics--one-armed push-ups, handstand push-ups, pistol squats--that make them more difficult and turn them into low-rep exercises that can build significant strength. No doubt this is possible with these strenuous versions of the exercises. There are people who tout advantages they claim are associated with calisthenics, such as getting a good feel for how to move your body, and maybe there is something to this.
However, I wonder whether anyone has any thoughts on why these strenuous exercises should strain the joints any less than a similar level of exertion when lifting weights. I happen to believe that lifting will not place undue strain on the joints if done properly, but since the issue has been raised, I'm curious about what difference anyone might claim there is between any strain that lifting might place on the body and doing "advanced calisthenics."
Suppose you weigh 180 lb. If you do pull-ups, why will this place any less stress on the arm and shoulder joints than lat-pulling 180? Why would pistol squats strain the knees any less than 360-lb. leg presses? Is there any reason to believe that a handstand push-up would stress the joints any less than a 180-lb. shoulder press? It seems to me that there is a flaw in criticizing weight training for supposedly stressing the joints if the person doing the criticizing advocates calisthenic exercises that involve a level of exertion similar to pumping some fairly heavy iron. If I'm missing something, I'd be interested in thoughts and information on what the difference might be.
Calesthenics are more natural. You lift in a way your body was designed to lift. Nothing external is included.
Calesthenics actually builds up and protects your joints. Weight training can do the same thing, but I wonder if consistant heavy weight lifting puts too much stress on your body.
I don't believe our joints were designed to lift up 400+ lbs consistantly for example.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
