my guess is zach's squats are high in the 70s big sense, but even if you're squatting 345 to an inch or two over parallel, you should be pulling well over 325.

I thought the purpose of Rip doing these case studies was to refute Lyle's article?

I did read Lyle's article a while ago, and you are correct that he didn't say it was a hard limit and that young people could surpass it.

But it seemed to me from the way he phrased it in his article and from his subsequent comments on his forum that this was intended to be a grudging, limited exception. Something like "maybe a young kid can squeak out 3 pounds a month" or whatever.

Also doesn't glycogen count as LBM? I thought LBM was everything except fat.


Maybe I am missing an article somewhere. I do feel like I might be missing something because nobody else seems to view the argument in the terms that I am... (and I am no stranger to misconstruing arguments, lolz.)

Ugh.

I just found out today that the Gold's that is walking distance from my house is closing. There's always a million people there and a pretty crappy area/low rent so I don't understand how they could suck ass enough to not make a profit, though when I inquired about buying a rack they said everything was leased.. which seems ******ed frankly. Dunno but pretty annoyed.

Are there any good resources on this forum for buying used stuff from craigslist?

form checks please?

Lies. One master does not bow down to another. Acknowledgment and recognition of their body of work is the mark of a professional.

No hands.

GENIUS IN OUR MIDST

Squats look great imo.

At first I thought you were setting up too far behind the bar in the deadlift, but the bar looks fine, so it could just be camera angle... but the little rolling thing you do with the bar between reps tilts me. :P

Squats look very solid. Still some buttwink but that will likely disappear as you get more reps under your belt and your PC becomes more flexible.

DLs looked very good as well. Is the dynamic start necessary because of flexibility issues or is it just a habit? I could forsee problems with control if you're still doing that when you're pulling 350+ which will be in the not too distant future.

What do you guys think about using occasional sunbed sessions for general health purposes? NOT FOR ZEH SEXINESS!!!

I'm from Scotland (-5,000,000 already on the sunlight scale) and have a fairly ****ty sleeping pattern. Up all night/sleep all day combined with not that unusual stretches of a few days or more where i'll hardly see any sunlight at all (and hardly ever at midday).

I'm beginning to think that this situation is not the greatest and tempted to cheat with a sunbed session occasionally. Again i'm completely indifferent to getting tanned or what not but curious to see if a few sessions could do me good. What you guys think?

I hear an avalanche of flames approaching

just take vit d instead. Its cheaper and simpler and it would be pretty odd to see a tanned person in Scotland I think. Plus, you might get burnt instead and end up looking like a leprechaun

Is this the March bitches thread?

Anyways, www.powerbar.com - free samples of the Power Bar Gel Blasts. You have to sign up with an email and agree to be sent those stupid offers and what not. I did it, we'll see how long it takes and if they even taste good or not.

Offer valid until 3/31/10.

Shrug I think tanning a tiny bit when living in sunless places like Scotland is fine to avoid the cancer patient/Casper the friendly ghost look. In fact, I think I'm a start doing it. Holla.

lol. Yeah. I would get worshiped as a god if i got tanned here, that or they'd force me to tick the ethnic minority box in the census until i went back to the uberpale. Producers of vampire movies often come here to pick up extras btw

So you think vitamin D=adequete sunlight for the most part?

Would there not be any other benefits from getting actual UV light on the skin? I know sunlight affects the circadian rythem a bit but i don't know if a sunbed could do anything for that.

Again i don't know the answers, just curious to what all you sun rich bronzed ***** have to say on the matter. Cheers.

They have medication for bladder problems you know.

I remember when i was 21 i went backpacking to Thailand and met some Swedish people and even they were like wtf at how white i was (i'm not anaemic btw). That's when you know you live in Mordor.

At least we can call ourselves vikings and rape and pillage

You can definitely get enough vit d from supplementation, but I'm not sure about the other health benefits. There is some increased risk of skin cancer and melanoma but I'm not sure of the exact increases. But hell if it makes you feel better then go ahead although it may be hard for a really pale person to tan. I would probably tempted to tan if I was that pale as well.

i am sure you didn't mean it, but you pretty much called skin cancer a health benefit.

It is if you're trying to lose weight.

...

Canc is the new poz.

because you are so pale you need extremely little sunlight for health reasons. That is the whole point of people who live in places with little sunlight evolving pale skin, so that the UV radiation can slice right through your melanocytes with no resistance. Probably walking around outside on a cloudy day is good enough, or going outside for a few minutes on the occasional sunny day.

However, the tradeoff is that any UV light, including tanning beds, will probably cause DNA damage to your skin cells.

not directly. someone on the SS boards brought up 2lb/month out of context without the exceptions given in the article.

don't think so, but don't know for sure. that's one thing he hasn't said outright and i'd like to know.

this is one of the things i was talking about a while ago when i mentioned water weight, visceral fat, and why i said i have no idea how many more ways these measurements could be skewed. i agree with you the LBM includes glycogen stores, but it definitely brings up another point. it isn't contractile muscle tissue and over a moderate gain of 15-20lb, it probably doesn't amount to much. so if someone were to gain 15lb and 1lb glycogen, it isn't very far off to count that as muscle tissue. but over an almost 80lb gain? again, i don't know. it's almost like "LBM gains" are only partially muscle gains and therefore misleading. all it really does is bring up more questions for me, questions lyle could likely answer but rip could not. what lyle has later said was "if he dieted down, he'd see he gained nowhere near that much muscle," which makes sense in this light (and in viewing his pictures).

most recent posts are below. also it's somewhat important to note rip actually claimed 46lb LBM gain in 6 months but that these were responses to someone who said it was 33. it was supposedly 31lb lbm gain in 11 weeks based on the novice effect article, so it's unclear exactly what rate lyle's arguing against.

Jdock dropping some science itt

So the cliffs on Zach at the minute is that he is just fat?

Also I was watching MTV the other day and they are gonna start showing Jersey Shore over here. One of the commercials for it was "GET JUICED. GET JERSEY SHORED"

The key takeaway is understanding the framework of realistic LBM gains and building plans around it.

Implications of this include the Anaconda debacle and general bulking plans.