ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION WITH DIET GURU CHAD NICOLS, IFBB PRO GREG KOVACS, and NUTRITION AND ANABOLIC EXPERT DAVE PALUMBO
MD: Mass monsters are now striving to compete with extreme size & conditioning, but keeping a svelte waistline. Obviously, most guys aren't successful at it, but athletes like Jay Cutler have. What's the secret?
CN: First off this has to be the first time that Jay Cutler and the word svelte have been used in the same sentence. So let's address that portion first. Not knocking Jay as a person - he's great, however when looking at the definition of svelte it means: trim, slender, lean or skinny - and although Jay does get lean he is far from have a trim or slender waistline. In all actuality, if you would put a tape around his waist and everyone else's who competed on the Arnold stage, Jay's would be the largest. In his defense, he was blessed with probably the widest shoulders in the show (if not in the sport) - balancing out that waistline. I believe what you are addressing is not his waistline, but the flatness and non-distended look of his stomach. This comes from several things - primarily his genetics and having a longer torso - when you look at the majority of athletes who have an elongated torso, you will notice they have very nice abdominal insertions and a flatter look to the midsection versus a shorter waist athlete - who will appear bunchy and become more easily distended in that area. Depending on what region of the torso appears distended - this will tell quite a bit of how it got that way. If a person tends to look bloated or distended up high on the midsection (under the chest area), usually this is from the body depositing inner abdominal fat and the way to help eliminate this is to diet for a longer period of time - I have found that inner abdominal fat takes the longest to get rid of. Lower distention on the midsection is a direct result of long-term insulin and growth hormone use (or misuse). The problem with this effect is that once a person has distention due to this, depending on the severity of the distention, this effect could be irreversible. The secret is to cycle growth and insulin just like you would anything else - giving your body time off and time to recuperate from the effects is always good.
DP: Chad brings to light a very interesting point. Most critics think that bloated abdomens imply heavy drug usage when, in fact, some of the heaviest drug users have the prettiest midsections. The bottom line is that as you pack on more and more muscle (especially as the bodybuilder increases his lean weight over 250lbs), the abdominal musculature has nowhere to go but outward (thus leading to the bloated abdominal look). As Chad points out, however, not every "huge" bodybuilder has this "problem" due to the fact that their genetically long torso can handle (or hold) the increased muscle mass better than say an individual with a small frame and short torso. GK: All bodybuilders carry extra food around causing the famous bloat. Some however do make a conscious effort to vacuum their stomach and control their abdominal muscles. By practicing this all year it helps to give the endurance needed while on stage. If you carefully look at the competitors while on stage posing when they think that you cannot see them, they relax their stomachs (i.e. transitions between poses).
MD: Synthol is all over that ass. Epidemic proportions is no exaggeration. What do you guys think about this shit, and any long-term sides we may not be aware of?
CN: In all honesty - I hate it! . . .but what are you going to do - no matter what you preach to these guys they're still probably going to use it. The problem is if one guy is using it and scoring high and getting away with it- then the next guy wants to use it and then some to surpass him - and so on and so on. Again, in all honesty, I think if the guys could separate themselves from the competitive thinking and take a good objective look at themselves, they would realize it's doing more harm than good. In the last 6-7 years, since synthol has become so prominent in the sport, I have only seen 1 guy (who will remain nameless) that has been able to use it and have it look good. It seems that everyone else who uses it loses definition, smoothes out the muscles or "knots" up certain areas. As far as unknown side effects - who knows - new ones will probably keep popping up in years to come - but the known of clogged arteries and heart failure should be enough to keep a person away from it. Anyone with any common sense should know that if you are injecting what can basically be compared to "cosmetic cholesterol" into your muscles, some of it has to dissipate out of the muscle and where will it go? . . .Some of it will end up on the outer shell of the muscle, causing the smooth look, some of it will end up in the lungs and the rest, more than likely in the heart and brain -- sounds like a GREAT product, eh??? DP: Synthol is really a fancy term for injectable anabolic steroids (minus the actual drugs). In other words, Synthol is the OIL portion of the injectable steroid. Bodybuilders use it to help volumize (fill up) the muscle cells. This volumization serves two purposes: 1) It makes the muscle appear fuller and rounder from a cosmetic standpoint. 2) It helps to stretch out the muscle fascia (the sheath that surrounds the muscle) so that, ultimately, the muscle will be able to expand at a faster rate (NOTE: One theory of muscle growth hypothesizes that it is the fascia of the muscle that limits how fast that muscle will grow. In other words, the faster one can stretch the fascial sheath that surrounds each muscle-- something that synthol does very well, the great the ease with which the muscle cells can expand and thus grow). As far as the long-term safety of synthol is concerned, one must realize that synthol is comprised of primarily medium chain triglycerides (MCT). From a biochemistry standpoint, MCT's are FATS that burn like carbohydrates (i.e. They travel from the bloodstream to the mitochondria-- energy-producing part of the muscle cell-- without requiring a single transporter [unlike other fats]). Therefore, when synthol is injected into a muscle group, it, ultimately, will be metabolized as quickly and efficiently as is any orally consumed MCT.
GK: Synthol is definitely getting out of control. This is true now for all levels of bodybuilders. Any oil, steroids included, excessively injected into one area over time will build up scar tissue and potentially becomes encapsulated. This trapped oil can become abscessed at any time. When the capsule eventually breaks, the entire muscle can become infected. Ironically, in most cases, Synthol is not making the body parts look any better. It almost always leaves the injected area both watery and lumpy. Considering these facts, it is a wonder that Synthol use is so popular. MD: Simple question, mofo's. Guys are bigger and harder than ever on stage and walking around during the off-season. Whats up?
CN: This is an easy one to answer - in today's world we have better equipment, and better knowledge in terms of diet and supplementation and how the body works. Because of the ease of finding information on the internet, we have more informed and better educated athletes walking around today.
DP: I agree with Chad in that technology has definitely played a huge role in increasing the size and conditioning of modern day bodybuilders; however, we would be foolish to neglect the fact that "barriers" are a big impediment to progress. It takes a truly enlightened and determined individual to help push people to set new limits and break through old barriers. Dorian Yates showed that it was possible to weigh 300lbs in the off-season (with relatively low bodyfat) and then compete at 270lbs (ripped to the bone) on the Mr. Olympia stage. Once he dispelled the mystique behind that mystical barrier, a whole slew of 300lb bodybuilders popped up (with more than a few who competed at over 260lbs).
GK: So what? In any sport the athletes become more advanced. This just shows how bodybuilders are improving and taking the sport to the next level. MD: What do you guys think about insulin, GH and IGF-1 use?
CN: As far as the IGF-1 goes, I'm not a big believer in - but that is personal opinion. Most of the athletes that I have known that have used it, have basically got nothing out of it. The few that I know that got a little something out of it - only received results the first time they used it - and received no results thereafter. GH and Insulin are another matter. I feel these two products, especially when used together, are unbelievable. It's the reason that athletes are 30 pounds heavier on stage. The whole deal with the GH and insulin is in the way you take it. Like everything, there is a right way and a wrong way. Taken the wrong way and in excess can lead to the distention of the stomach - not to mention other health problems. DP: IGF-1, if used correctly, is the most powerful stimulator of muscle cell hyperplasia (the production of NEW muscle cells) around today. It makes Growth Hormone seem very mild in effect. The problem is that most people today are either using fake IGF-1 or are using it incorrectly (see my article in an earlier Muscular Development for more information on IGF-1). Growth Hormone, in its own right, is a very strong "fat burner" and initiator of cell hyperplasia; however, GH exerts its hyperplastic effect by stimulating the liver to produce IGF-1. Its fat-burning effect, however, is a direct action of GH. Because GH's fat-mobilizing effects directly antagonize the actions of insulin, it sometimes becomes necessary to supplement with insulin while on GH therapy. Without the proper amount of insulin in the body, protein and carbohydrates will not be efficiently absorbed and muscle growth will be stunted.
GK: This would be part of the explanation for your last question. Out of the three, Insulin is the most dangerous to use if you do not know how to properly use it. MD: Well, for the genetic disadvantaged, do you recommend overeating mass quantities of high fat, high calorie foods for gaining muscle?
CN: Yes and no. The main issue is still going to fall back to what kind of metabolism the athlete has and there are so many variables that go into this, it could take a few pages to cover. I have always recommended eating as much as you can - bad foods included - without getting excessively fat. Everyone is different and each individual needs to find where that line between good size and fat size falls.
DP: In the past, I always believed in gorging on protein and carbohydrates to gain large amounts of muscle. My new approach is to eat a high protein, moderate fat, moderate carbohydrate diet. The reason that most bodybuilders cannot gain weight is that they are afraid to eat FAT in their diet. Fat does not make you fat, however, too many carbohydrates do.
GK: This would of course depend on the individual's metabolism. If they are really skinny, then of course they would need to eat lots of food. However, if they are genetically "fat" then they would need to eat a more well balanced diet to avoid gaining extra body fat.
MD: Supplements are always a popular thing. What are some of your must-have supplements and those that suck ass?
CN: Where do I begin? I could ramble for hours about the ones that SUCK! Our entire industry, unfortunately, is FULL of them! I think one of the main "must haves" is a good pure whey isolate. How you can tell if a protein is a pure whey isolate is that it should dissolve and mix very easily. I also like a pure Glutamine Powder - somewhere around 20-30 grams a day - especially if you are using GH and insulin - incorporate Glutamine on your insulin days and see what happens. A true ECA stack, is obviously good. The key here is going to be the transport system in the product. There are very few on the market that have a special "delivery system". I'm obviously going to recommend "JACKED!" (ED NOTE: JACKED is Chad Nichols own personal brand of fat burner One crap product that comes to mind is calcium caseinate. I'm so tired of all the ads on how great it is because it's a slow-absorbing protein that lasts up to 8 hours, blah, blah, blah. Yes, it is slow, but it's also the highest in lactose and fat - bottom line the worst protein on the market. I wouldn't even feed it to my dogs!
And how about all those great new "protein candies"??? I will recommend these for one great use. If you are constipated these will do the trick to remedy that! Otherwise, stay away. Last but not least on my "shit list" is liquid creatine. I'm still not a believer that anyone has suspended creatine in any kind of liquid.
DP: As far as supplements are concerned, I always recommend a good multi-vitamin, 2000mg of vitamin C, 1000IU vitamin E, 2600mg primrose oil, and 2000mg glucosamine sulfate per day. 5 grams of micronized creatine per day is a great performance enhancer that no bodybuilder should be without. As far as fat-burners are concerned, I'm not a big believer in the ECA stack (I don't like the increase in blood pressure, the increase in heart rate, and the increase in cortisol levels that it causes). A much more effective, and at the same time safer, fat burner is USNIC ACID (which is a member of the new class of fat burners known as "uncoupling agents"). As far as crappy supplements go, I would have to say that RIBOSE tops that list. Other members of the top ten "junk" supplement list include any sugar-loaded creatine supplement, any liquid creatine (since no one has perfected a stable liquid creatine yet), and all those protein bars that purport to be the perfect food (no bar has yet to even come close to replacing a protein shake).
GK: I am now with a new company TNT (Total Nutritional Technologies) and I am very happy with them as they have developed high quality products that I actually use and am confident to recommend to others. The ones that I would not live without is their Nitro-ATP (creatine), Megatropin (GH & IGF-1 stimulator), Isolate X (the highest quality whey protein on the market), and their Thermokinetic X (fat burner & energy stimulant). I prefer using products that I know are top quality & that will show me results. MD: Did the heavy promotion of Dorian Yates' physique do more harm than good seeing that every pro upped their dosages to match is size and weird chemical-like conditioning?
CN: First off, I don't think this was so much a promotion of a Dorian like physique as much as it was of Dorian Yates - Mr. Olympia. It just so happened that Dorian's physique was one of freakish size and crazy conditioning - when he was at his best. I think definitely that this did steer a lot of athletes in that direction - because Dorian's physique as a Mr. Olympia physique is looked upon as the standard. Therefore most people felt they had to try to achieve that look. This is one of the HUGE problems with the sport - is that athletes are trying to be and become something they are not. One of the main practices I follow and try to stress to my athletes is to be the best athlete they can be - not try to become someone they are not.
DP: Dorian, like I mentioned before, helped usher bodybuilding into the 21st century. He showed that the only barrier to muscular progress was the one set forth by our minds. Once he proved that extraordinary muscular development was possible, it freed other bodybuilders of their own mental barriers and helped them to reach their own true physical limits. Only if progress is considered to be a bad thing can Dorian's influence be viewed as being negative. Since progress is the one thing that, ultimately, takes bodybuilding to higher and more interesting levels, Dorian's influence can ONLY be construed as a positive event.
GK: I find this to just be an insult to all the hard work that Dorian put into this sport. I am sure that he was not doing anything different than any of the other top bodybuilders at that time. He just worked harder than anyone else. Believe me, I have seen him train. It's truly inspirational! MD: Jay Cutler and Markus Ruhl allegedly flunked the diuretic test at the 2001 Olympia. Some guys claim to beat the test using diuretics not tested for or plasma expanders.
CN: First off, there was nothing ALLEGED about the flunking of the tests - pure and simple, THEY FLUNKED. The test wasn't overturned because they didn't flunk - the tests were overturned because the lab that tested the samples (although an accredited testing lab), didn't spend the money to become I.O.C. approved testing facility. When you consider the fact we, as a sport, no longer have Olympic recognition, this shouldn't even matter. Basically, the tests were overturned due to something that has nothing to do with the I.F.B.B. What I find interesting is that over the past several years, this is the same lab that tested and found positive samples for Nasser El Sonbaty, Lesa Lewis, and Gayle Moher (not to mention others) -and all of these tests stood as positive (all these athletes lost their placements and prize money). The other major issue here pure and simple, Jay Cutler and Markus Ruhl "allegedly" (ha ha) flunked for diuretics that were clearly listed on the I.F.B.B. banned substance list. There were 19 other athletes unable to use these diuretics and who abided by the rules. This is a MAJOR issue when you consider diuretics like aldactone and lasix (banned substances) since these two diuretics alone make astronomical differences in the finished look of an athlete compared to an athlete who didn't use them. Everyone else had to come up with a method of getting rid of water or using something that's off the list. However, there is nothing "off the list" that is even remotely close to the "finishing effects" of these two diuretics. It's like the difference between two drag cars racing-- one using regular gasoline and one using jet fuel. Big surprise that the one that used the jet fuel won. As far as getting around the test, I feel that the I.F.B.B. has put together the banned substance list for a reason: The drugs on the list obviously are the most dangerous and the ones that caused a lot of problems (and death in a few cases) in the past for athletes. I don't think by finding an alternative diuretic "off the list" or coming up with some other form of getting rid of water is considered "getting around the test". I think that TAKING a banned substance and getting lucky and not flunking is "getting around a test". If you want to talk about plasma expanders, you are talking to the guy who has had the most publicity over them (ha ha). In all honesty, plasma expanders don't work!!!! On paper, the theory looks great. Six years ago when I was doing research on alternative ways to rid the system of excessive subcutaneous water, I did look into plasma expanders and osmotic diuretics. After doing several studies with a doctor friend of mine, we concluded they don't work. The theory with plasma expanders is that by using them, you pull only subcutaneous fluid into the blood thus giving an incredible dry look. If you could do this and then get rid of the water, it would be great. However, how do you get rid of the water? Wow, hey, you need a diuretic to get rid of the water. Unfortunately the purpose was to try to find a way to rid the body of water without using a diuretic. So, in short, you have to use the plasma expanders in conjunction with diuretics (not alone). If you use them alone, there is a window of about 30 minutes that you look great then all the water "spills "back out subcutaneously (under the skin) and you look worse than you did before! Additionally, only way to use a plasma expander is to run an I.V. drip which is not really very practical.
DP: Chad answered this question more than adequately.
GK: As I do not know what any other athlete other than myself does, I am not able to comment on this. MD: Back in the safe ol' days, an athlete's first steroid stack consisted of a few Dianabol and 200mg's of Deca for eight weeks. Today, however, we're seeing novices shooting up to two grams a week!
CN: This goes hand in hand with our society today. Why wait for results. We want them and we want them NOW! If a guy starting out would only use a few D-Bol or between 200-400 mg of Deca a week, they would get the same results, as if they would use 2,000mg of something a week. One of the main problems today is that there is so much bad information out there (everyone thinks they are an expert). Every gym has a "gym doctor" in it and every gym doctor wants to be "the guru". I don't know how many times I have seen guys with limited knowledge covering up the lack of knowledge by using more and more drugs. If something's not working, they figure, why not take more drugs? This is their answer to everything.
DP: People see physiques like Dorian Yates, Nasser, and Markus Ruhl and they figure that whatever they THINK these guys are taking, they'll take double that. It is this MORE IS BETTER mentality that is adding danger to the sport. And it is when these guys get sick that they blame guys like Dorian for their own stupidity. Meanwhile, Dorian, during his entire Mr. Olympia reign, never had a health problem related to drug use. Go figure?
GK: This helps to explain why we have so few new bodybuilders doing well (Consistently) once they turn pro. This is why the top bodybuilders in the Mr. Olympia have been the same for years. They didn't burn out when they were younger. By starting using the gear too soon and by using too much they will never reach their true potential.
MD: Guys, what are your two favorite steroids (oral or injectable) and why, and which ones do you feel are overrated?
CN: 1) Off-season, I'm going with the old standby - Test Cypionate - it's a slow acting testosterone - and test is still the base for building strength and quality muscle. 2) Pre-Contest (two come to mind) - 25mg Primobolin tabs and American Winstrol-V tabs (Upjohn). I like these two because put together in the right cycle and with the right diet, gives an incredible look to the muscle. In terms of overrated, I don't know if there are any that are overrated. All steroids work but I do have one, American Anadrol-50. When you compare the effects of this product to the high cost, there are many less expensive products you could use that would work just as well. I will say, A-50 is a great product, however, when you are looking at a cost of upwards of $700.00 a bottle, depending on your source, it's not really worth it. I know the manufacturer was looking at stopping production of this product which may have already taken place. DP: Off-season, I would have to say that TEST CYPIONATE and TEST ENANTHATE are my favorites (they are long acting and don't leave you sore). Pre-contest, I prefer Finajet (trenbolone acetate) and Winstrol. I also believe in keeping a base of some kind of testosterone (preferably a fast acting testosterone like Test Propionate).
GK: The most popular steroids would be testosterone (enanthate, cypionate),& dianabol tabs (offseason. Winstrol and Primobolin (precontest). MD: Fantasy juice: If you could bring back any steroid out of extinction or from the laboratory drawing room floor, what would you choose? Turinabol comes to mind.
CN: I would have to say Blasterone because I loved the "glittery" crap at the bottom of the bottle (just kidding). In all honesty I would have to say American Test Suspension! In my opinion this is one of the overall best pharmaceuticals ever made. It fit into any situation. Off-season is could be used for strength and size and pre-contest it allowed you to stay strong, maintain muscle size, and when put in conjunction with the right cycle, it gave a very hard look to the muscle. It was something a person could take right up to the day of the show because it was in and out of the system quickly and it caused very little water retention. The shitty test suspension on the market today can't even come close to the original American Test suspension. Most of it is non-micronized and is VERY dirty. You can usually tell an athlete who is using one of the current test suspensions on the black market because they are the ones with the giant infections on their bodies.
DP: Finajet (trenbolone acetate) was probably the best anabolic steroid every produced. Trenbolone acetate is more androgenic than testosterone yet it doesn't aromatize (convert to estrogen). It enabled the off-season bodybuilder to be strong and to pack on muscle mass while for the pre-contest bodybuilder it enabled them to look hard, be aggressive in the gym, and, most importantly, it helped them to recover from intense weight-training and cardio workouts. While trenbolone can still be found on the black market, it is not currently being "legitimately" produced.
GK: From what the old bodybuilders would indicate, they liked the original parabolan and the original blasterone. MD: Why switch up a steroid stack when trying to diet down? What sort of techniques do you prefer -- drug and diet wise -- when carving it up?
CN: The reason for switching stacks: In the off-season, you are using slower acting drugs such as cypionate, enanthate, deca, etc. and you switch to faster acting compounds during pre-contest preparation such as Winstrol, test propionate, Anavar, etc. This way, there is a lot less water retention and the drugs are quickly in and out of the person's system thus giving a harder look to the muscle. As far as techniques with "supplements" and diet goes, this is what my clients pay good money for. I can't give those secrets away for free-- sorry guys!
DP: I usually suggest to my clients that they maintain a steady baseline of testosterone throughout the off-season and pre-contest period. Usually around 4-6 weeks before a show, I will suggest that they switch to a faster acting testosterone like test propionate or test suspension. As for anabolic compounds, I usually recommend the use of Equipoise, Deca, or Finajet in the off-season while winstrol, primobolin, and anavar are preferred pre-contest. GK: Bodybuilders are changing their stacks around while pre-contest because some drugs will cause more water retention than others. It is obviously important to control these water levels as the show gets closer.
CN: First off this has to be the first time that Jay Cutler and the word svelte have been used in the same sentence. So let's address that portion first. Not knocking Jay as a person - he's great, however when looking at the definition of svelte it means: trim, slender, lean or skinny - and although Jay does get lean he is far from have a trim or slender waistline. In all actuality, if you would put a tape around his waist and everyone else's who competed on the Arnold stage, Jay's would be the largest. In his defense, he was blessed with probably the widest shoulders in the show (if not in the sport) - balancing out that waistline. I believe what you are addressing is not his waistline, but the flatness and non-distended look of his stomach. This comes from several things - primarily his genetics and having a longer torso - when you look at the majority of athletes who have an elongated torso, you will notice they have very nice abdominal insertions and a flatter look to the midsection versus a shorter waist athlete - who will appear bunchy and become more easily distended in that area. Depending on what region of the torso appears distended - this will tell quite a bit of how it got that way. If a person tends to look bloated or distended up high on the midsection (under the chest area), usually this is from the body depositing inner abdominal fat and the way to help eliminate this is to diet for a longer period of time - I have found that inner abdominal fat takes the longest to get rid of. Lower distention on the midsection is a direct result of long-term insulin and growth hormone use (or misuse). The problem with this effect is that once a person has distention due to this, depending on the severity of the distention, this effect could be irreversible. The secret is to cycle growth and insulin just like you would anything else - giving your body time off and time to recuperate from the effects is always good.
DP: Chad brings to light a very interesting point. Most critics think that bloated abdomens imply heavy drug usage when, in fact, some of the heaviest drug users have the prettiest midsections. The bottom line is that as you pack on more and more muscle (especially as the bodybuilder increases his lean weight over 250lbs), the abdominal musculature has nowhere to go but outward (thus leading to the bloated abdominal look). As Chad points out, however, not every "huge" bodybuilder has this "problem" due to the fact that their genetically long torso can handle (or hold) the increased muscle mass better than say an individual with a small frame and short torso. GK: All bodybuilders carry extra food around causing the famous bloat. Some however do make a conscious effort to vacuum their stomach and control their abdominal muscles. By practicing this all year it helps to give the endurance needed while on stage. If you carefully look at the competitors while on stage posing when they think that you cannot see them, they relax their stomachs (i.e. transitions between poses).
MD: Synthol is all over that ass. Epidemic proportions is no exaggeration. What do you guys think about this shit, and any long-term sides we may not be aware of?
CN: In all honesty - I hate it! . . .but what are you going to do - no matter what you preach to these guys they're still probably going to use it. The problem is if one guy is using it and scoring high and getting away with it- then the next guy wants to use it and then some to surpass him - and so on and so on. Again, in all honesty, I think if the guys could separate themselves from the competitive thinking and take a good objective look at themselves, they would realize it's doing more harm than good. In the last 6-7 years, since synthol has become so prominent in the sport, I have only seen 1 guy (who will remain nameless) that has been able to use it and have it look good. It seems that everyone else who uses it loses definition, smoothes out the muscles or "knots" up certain areas. As far as unknown side effects - who knows - new ones will probably keep popping up in years to come - but the known of clogged arteries and heart failure should be enough to keep a person away from it. Anyone with any common sense should know that if you are injecting what can basically be compared to "cosmetic cholesterol" into your muscles, some of it has to dissipate out of the muscle and where will it go? . . .Some of it will end up on the outer shell of the muscle, causing the smooth look, some of it will end up in the lungs and the rest, more than likely in the heart and brain -- sounds like a GREAT product, eh??? DP: Synthol is really a fancy term for injectable anabolic steroids (minus the actual drugs). In other words, Synthol is the OIL portion of the injectable steroid. Bodybuilders use it to help volumize (fill up) the muscle cells. This volumization serves two purposes: 1) It makes the muscle appear fuller and rounder from a cosmetic standpoint. 2) It helps to stretch out the muscle fascia (the sheath that surrounds the muscle) so that, ultimately, the muscle will be able to expand at a faster rate (NOTE: One theory of muscle growth hypothesizes that it is the fascia of the muscle that limits how fast that muscle will grow. In other words, the faster one can stretch the fascial sheath that surrounds each muscle-- something that synthol does very well, the great the ease with which the muscle cells can expand and thus grow). As far as the long-term safety of synthol is concerned, one must realize that synthol is comprised of primarily medium chain triglycerides (MCT). From a biochemistry standpoint, MCT's are FATS that burn like carbohydrates (i.e. They travel from the bloodstream to the mitochondria-- energy-producing part of the muscle cell-- without requiring a single transporter [unlike other fats]). Therefore, when synthol is injected into a muscle group, it, ultimately, will be metabolized as quickly and efficiently as is any orally consumed MCT.
GK: Synthol is definitely getting out of control. This is true now for all levels of bodybuilders. Any oil, steroids included, excessively injected into one area over time will build up scar tissue and potentially becomes encapsulated. This trapped oil can become abscessed at any time. When the capsule eventually breaks, the entire muscle can become infected. Ironically, in most cases, Synthol is not making the body parts look any better. It almost always leaves the injected area both watery and lumpy. Considering these facts, it is a wonder that Synthol use is so popular. MD: Simple question, mofo's. Guys are bigger and harder than ever on stage and walking around during the off-season. Whats up?
CN: This is an easy one to answer - in today's world we have better equipment, and better knowledge in terms of diet and supplementation and how the body works. Because of the ease of finding information on the internet, we have more informed and better educated athletes walking around today.
DP: I agree with Chad in that technology has definitely played a huge role in increasing the size and conditioning of modern day bodybuilders; however, we would be foolish to neglect the fact that "barriers" are a big impediment to progress. It takes a truly enlightened and determined individual to help push people to set new limits and break through old barriers. Dorian Yates showed that it was possible to weigh 300lbs in the off-season (with relatively low bodyfat) and then compete at 270lbs (ripped to the bone) on the Mr. Olympia stage. Once he dispelled the mystique behind that mystical barrier, a whole slew of 300lb bodybuilders popped up (with more than a few who competed at over 260lbs).
GK: So what? In any sport the athletes become more advanced. This just shows how bodybuilders are improving and taking the sport to the next level. MD: What do you guys think about insulin, GH and IGF-1 use?
CN: As far as the IGF-1 goes, I'm not a big believer in - but that is personal opinion. Most of the athletes that I have known that have used it, have basically got nothing out of it. The few that I know that got a little something out of it - only received results the first time they used it - and received no results thereafter. GH and Insulin are another matter. I feel these two products, especially when used together, are unbelievable. It's the reason that athletes are 30 pounds heavier on stage. The whole deal with the GH and insulin is in the way you take it. Like everything, there is a right way and a wrong way. Taken the wrong way and in excess can lead to the distention of the stomach - not to mention other health problems. DP: IGF-1, if used correctly, is the most powerful stimulator of muscle cell hyperplasia (the production of NEW muscle cells) around today. It makes Growth Hormone seem very mild in effect. The problem is that most people today are either using fake IGF-1 or are using it incorrectly (see my article in an earlier Muscular Development for more information on IGF-1). Growth Hormone, in its own right, is a very strong "fat burner" and initiator of cell hyperplasia; however, GH exerts its hyperplastic effect by stimulating the liver to produce IGF-1. Its fat-burning effect, however, is a direct action of GH. Because GH's fat-mobilizing effects directly antagonize the actions of insulin, it sometimes becomes necessary to supplement with insulin while on GH therapy. Without the proper amount of insulin in the body, protein and carbohydrates will not be efficiently absorbed and muscle growth will be stunted.
GK: This would be part of the explanation for your last question. Out of the three, Insulin is the most dangerous to use if you do not know how to properly use it. MD: Well, for the genetic disadvantaged, do you recommend overeating mass quantities of high fat, high calorie foods for gaining muscle?
CN: Yes and no. The main issue is still going to fall back to what kind of metabolism the athlete has and there are so many variables that go into this, it could take a few pages to cover. I have always recommended eating as much as you can - bad foods included - without getting excessively fat. Everyone is different and each individual needs to find where that line between good size and fat size falls.
DP: In the past, I always believed in gorging on protein and carbohydrates to gain large amounts of muscle. My new approach is to eat a high protein, moderate fat, moderate carbohydrate diet. The reason that most bodybuilders cannot gain weight is that they are afraid to eat FAT in their diet. Fat does not make you fat, however, too many carbohydrates do.
GK: This would of course depend on the individual's metabolism. If they are really skinny, then of course they would need to eat lots of food. However, if they are genetically "fat" then they would need to eat a more well balanced diet to avoid gaining extra body fat.
MD: Supplements are always a popular thing. What are some of your must-have supplements and those that suck ass?
CN: Where do I begin? I could ramble for hours about the ones that SUCK! Our entire industry, unfortunately, is FULL of them! I think one of the main "must haves" is a good pure whey isolate. How you can tell if a protein is a pure whey isolate is that it should dissolve and mix very easily. I also like a pure Glutamine Powder - somewhere around 20-30 grams a day - especially if you are using GH and insulin - incorporate Glutamine on your insulin days and see what happens. A true ECA stack, is obviously good. The key here is going to be the transport system in the product. There are very few on the market that have a special "delivery system". I'm obviously going to recommend "JACKED!" (ED NOTE: JACKED is Chad Nichols own personal brand of fat burner One crap product that comes to mind is calcium caseinate. I'm so tired of all the ads on how great it is because it's a slow-absorbing protein that lasts up to 8 hours, blah, blah, blah. Yes, it is slow, but it's also the highest in lactose and fat - bottom line the worst protein on the market. I wouldn't even feed it to my dogs!
And how about all those great new "protein candies"??? I will recommend these for one great use. If you are constipated these will do the trick to remedy that! Otherwise, stay away. Last but not least on my "shit list" is liquid creatine. I'm still not a believer that anyone has suspended creatine in any kind of liquid.
DP: As far as supplements are concerned, I always recommend a good multi-vitamin, 2000mg of vitamin C, 1000IU vitamin E, 2600mg primrose oil, and 2000mg glucosamine sulfate per day. 5 grams of micronized creatine per day is a great performance enhancer that no bodybuilder should be without. As far as fat-burners are concerned, I'm not a big believer in the ECA stack (I don't like the increase in blood pressure, the increase in heart rate, and the increase in cortisol levels that it causes). A much more effective, and at the same time safer, fat burner is USNIC ACID (which is a member of the new class of fat burners known as "uncoupling agents"). As far as crappy supplements go, I would have to say that RIBOSE tops that list. Other members of the top ten "junk" supplement list include any sugar-loaded creatine supplement, any liquid creatine (since no one has perfected a stable liquid creatine yet), and all those protein bars that purport to be the perfect food (no bar has yet to even come close to replacing a protein shake).
GK: I am now with a new company TNT (Total Nutritional Technologies) and I am very happy with them as they have developed high quality products that I actually use and am confident to recommend to others. The ones that I would not live without is their Nitro-ATP (creatine), Megatropin (GH & IGF-1 stimulator), Isolate X (the highest quality whey protein on the market), and their Thermokinetic X (fat burner & energy stimulant). I prefer using products that I know are top quality & that will show me results. MD: Did the heavy promotion of Dorian Yates' physique do more harm than good seeing that every pro upped their dosages to match is size and weird chemical-like conditioning?
CN: First off, I don't think this was so much a promotion of a Dorian like physique as much as it was of Dorian Yates - Mr. Olympia. It just so happened that Dorian's physique was one of freakish size and crazy conditioning - when he was at his best. I think definitely that this did steer a lot of athletes in that direction - because Dorian's physique as a Mr. Olympia physique is looked upon as the standard. Therefore most people felt they had to try to achieve that look. This is one of the HUGE problems with the sport - is that athletes are trying to be and become something they are not. One of the main practices I follow and try to stress to my athletes is to be the best athlete they can be - not try to become someone they are not.
DP: Dorian, like I mentioned before, helped usher bodybuilding into the 21st century. He showed that the only barrier to muscular progress was the one set forth by our minds. Once he proved that extraordinary muscular development was possible, it freed other bodybuilders of their own mental barriers and helped them to reach their own true physical limits. Only if progress is considered to be a bad thing can Dorian's influence be viewed as being negative. Since progress is the one thing that, ultimately, takes bodybuilding to higher and more interesting levels, Dorian's influence can ONLY be construed as a positive event.
GK: I find this to just be an insult to all the hard work that Dorian put into this sport. I am sure that he was not doing anything different than any of the other top bodybuilders at that time. He just worked harder than anyone else. Believe me, I have seen him train. It's truly inspirational! MD: Jay Cutler and Markus Ruhl allegedly flunked the diuretic test at the 2001 Olympia. Some guys claim to beat the test using diuretics not tested for or plasma expanders.
CN: First off, there was nothing ALLEGED about the flunking of the tests - pure and simple, THEY FLUNKED. The test wasn't overturned because they didn't flunk - the tests were overturned because the lab that tested the samples (although an accredited testing lab), didn't spend the money to become I.O.C. approved testing facility. When you consider the fact we, as a sport, no longer have Olympic recognition, this shouldn't even matter. Basically, the tests were overturned due to something that has nothing to do with the I.F.B.B. What I find interesting is that over the past several years, this is the same lab that tested and found positive samples for Nasser El Sonbaty, Lesa Lewis, and Gayle Moher (not to mention others) -and all of these tests stood as positive (all these athletes lost their placements and prize money). The other major issue here pure and simple, Jay Cutler and Markus Ruhl "allegedly" (ha ha) flunked for diuretics that were clearly listed on the I.F.B.B. banned substance list. There were 19 other athletes unable to use these diuretics and who abided by the rules. This is a MAJOR issue when you consider diuretics like aldactone and lasix (banned substances) since these two diuretics alone make astronomical differences in the finished look of an athlete compared to an athlete who didn't use them. Everyone else had to come up with a method of getting rid of water or using something that's off the list. However, there is nothing "off the list" that is even remotely close to the "finishing effects" of these two diuretics. It's like the difference between two drag cars racing-- one using regular gasoline and one using jet fuel. Big surprise that the one that used the jet fuel won. As far as getting around the test, I feel that the I.F.B.B. has put together the banned substance list for a reason: The drugs on the list obviously are the most dangerous and the ones that caused a lot of problems (and death in a few cases) in the past for athletes. I don't think by finding an alternative diuretic "off the list" or coming up with some other form of getting rid of water is considered "getting around the test". I think that TAKING a banned substance and getting lucky and not flunking is "getting around a test". If you want to talk about plasma expanders, you are talking to the guy who has had the most publicity over them (ha ha). In all honesty, plasma expanders don't work!!!! On paper, the theory looks great. Six years ago when I was doing research on alternative ways to rid the system of excessive subcutaneous water, I did look into plasma expanders and osmotic diuretics. After doing several studies with a doctor friend of mine, we concluded they don't work. The theory with plasma expanders is that by using them, you pull only subcutaneous fluid into the blood thus giving an incredible dry look. If you could do this and then get rid of the water, it would be great. However, how do you get rid of the water? Wow, hey, you need a diuretic to get rid of the water. Unfortunately the purpose was to try to find a way to rid the body of water without using a diuretic. So, in short, you have to use the plasma expanders in conjunction with diuretics (not alone). If you use them alone, there is a window of about 30 minutes that you look great then all the water "spills "back out subcutaneously (under the skin) and you look worse than you did before! Additionally, only way to use a plasma expander is to run an I.V. drip which is not really very practical.
DP: Chad answered this question more than adequately.
GK: As I do not know what any other athlete other than myself does, I am not able to comment on this. MD: Back in the safe ol' days, an athlete's first steroid stack consisted of a few Dianabol and 200mg's of Deca for eight weeks. Today, however, we're seeing novices shooting up to two grams a week!
CN: This goes hand in hand with our society today. Why wait for results. We want them and we want them NOW! If a guy starting out would only use a few D-Bol or between 200-400 mg of Deca a week, they would get the same results, as if they would use 2,000mg of something a week. One of the main problems today is that there is so much bad information out there (everyone thinks they are an expert). Every gym has a "gym doctor" in it and every gym doctor wants to be "the guru". I don't know how many times I have seen guys with limited knowledge covering up the lack of knowledge by using more and more drugs. If something's not working, they figure, why not take more drugs? This is their answer to everything.
DP: People see physiques like Dorian Yates, Nasser, and Markus Ruhl and they figure that whatever they THINK these guys are taking, they'll take double that. It is this MORE IS BETTER mentality that is adding danger to the sport. And it is when these guys get sick that they blame guys like Dorian for their own stupidity. Meanwhile, Dorian, during his entire Mr. Olympia reign, never had a health problem related to drug use. Go figure?
GK: This helps to explain why we have so few new bodybuilders doing well (Consistently) once they turn pro. This is why the top bodybuilders in the Mr. Olympia have been the same for years. They didn't burn out when they were younger. By starting using the gear too soon and by using too much they will never reach their true potential.
MD: Guys, what are your two favorite steroids (oral or injectable) and why, and which ones do you feel are overrated?
CN: 1) Off-season, I'm going with the old standby - Test Cypionate - it's a slow acting testosterone - and test is still the base for building strength and quality muscle. 2) Pre-Contest (two come to mind) - 25mg Primobolin tabs and American Winstrol-V tabs (Upjohn). I like these two because put together in the right cycle and with the right diet, gives an incredible look to the muscle. In terms of overrated, I don't know if there are any that are overrated. All steroids work but I do have one, American Anadrol-50. When you compare the effects of this product to the high cost, there are many less expensive products you could use that would work just as well. I will say, A-50 is a great product, however, when you are looking at a cost of upwards of $700.00 a bottle, depending on your source, it's not really worth it. I know the manufacturer was looking at stopping production of this product which may have already taken place. DP: Off-season, I would have to say that TEST CYPIONATE and TEST ENANTHATE are my favorites (they are long acting and don't leave you sore). Pre-contest, I prefer Finajet (trenbolone acetate) and Winstrol. I also believe in keeping a base of some kind of testosterone (preferably a fast acting testosterone like Test Propionate).
GK: The most popular steroids would be testosterone (enanthate, cypionate),& dianabol tabs (offseason. Winstrol and Primobolin (precontest). MD: Fantasy juice: If you could bring back any steroid out of extinction or from the laboratory drawing room floor, what would you choose? Turinabol comes to mind.
CN: I would have to say Blasterone because I loved the "glittery" crap at the bottom of the bottle (just kidding). In all honesty I would have to say American Test Suspension! In my opinion this is one of the overall best pharmaceuticals ever made. It fit into any situation. Off-season is could be used for strength and size and pre-contest it allowed you to stay strong, maintain muscle size, and when put in conjunction with the right cycle, it gave a very hard look to the muscle. It was something a person could take right up to the day of the show because it was in and out of the system quickly and it caused very little water retention. The shitty test suspension on the market today can't even come close to the original American Test suspension. Most of it is non-micronized and is VERY dirty. You can usually tell an athlete who is using one of the current test suspensions on the black market because they are the ones with the giant infections on their bodies.
DP: Finajet (trenbolone acetate) was probably the best anabolic steroid every produced. Trenbolone acetate is more androgenic than testosterone yet it doesn't aromatize (convert to estrogen). It enabled the off-season bodybuilder to be strong and to pack on muscle mass while for the pre-contest bodybuilder it enabled them to look hard, be aggressive in the gym, and, most importantly, it helped them to recover from intense weight-training and cardio workouts. While trenbolone can still be found on the black market, it is not currently being "legitimately" produced.
GK: From what the old bodybuilders would indicate, they liked the original parabolan and the original blasterone. MD: Why switch up a steroid stack when trying to diet down? What sort of techniques do you prefer -- drug and diet wise -- when carving it up?
CN: The reason for switching stacks: In the off-season, you are using slower acting drugs such as cypionate, enanthate, deca, etc. and you switch to faster acting compounds during pre-contest preparation such as Winstrol, test propionate, Anavar, etc. This way, there is a lot less water retention and the drugs are quickly in and out of the person's system thus giving a harder look to the muscle. As far as techniques with "supplements" and diet goes, this is what my clients pay good money for. I can't give those secrets away for free-- sorry guys!
DP: I usually suggest to my clients that they maintain a steady baseline of testosterone throughout the off-season and pre-contest period. Usually around 4-6 weeks before a show, I will suggest that they switch to a faster acting testosterone like test propionate or test suspension. As for anabolic compounds, I usually recommend the use of Equipoise, Deca, or Finajet in the off-season while winstrol, primobolin, and anavar are preferred pre-contest. GK: Bodybuilders are changing their stacks around while pre-contest because some drugs will cause more water retention than others. It is obviously important to control these water levels as the show gets closer.
