• Keep up to date with Ausbb via Twitter and Facebook. Please add us!
  • Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

    The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.

    Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.

HRT Australia (Perth)

There is nothing "interesting" about it at all
If you bother to read the full study, those with levels of 500 to 1000 ng per deciliter had the lowest risk out of any group, which falls in line with all the other studies. What's "interesting" about something that agrees with the points already made? Nothing
 
0ni said:
There is nothing "interesting" about it at all
If you bother to read the full study, those with levels of 500 to 1000 ng per deciliter had the lowest risk out of any group, which falls in line with all the other studies. What's "interesting" about something that agrees with the points already made? Nothing
Click to expand...


No matter the result of the study it is still interesting.

Is this what you are referring too.
Men with testosterone levels in the highest quartile during the intervention period, as compared with all other subjects, were at elevated risk for cardiovascular-related events (hazard ratio, 2.4; P=0.05). Among subjects who were randomly assigned to the testosterone group, testosterone levels during the intervention period were available for 81 subjects. Cardiovascular-related events were reported in 4 of 14 subjects with testosterone levels higher than 1000 ng per deciliter during the treatment period, by 5 of 21 with levels of 500 to 1000 ng per deciliter, and by 7 of 46 subjects with levels of less than 500 ng per deciliter.
Click to expand...

In any case what you are trying to do is data mining. Troll through the data to find a snippet of information that agrees with your agenda and disregard he rest. Good luck with that.
 
Last edited:
Bazza20 said:
I had a lol at that. Von benches 100kg more than Oni clean and Oni says he doesn't want to hear excuses.

Only Oni. Lol.
Click to expand...

To be fair to the whipper snapper, he trains harder than I ever have and probably has a bigger chip (spite beats gear any day). I'm a lazy slob in the gym, and always have been. With a little revision to his program and proper harnessing of the attitude, he could be elite within five years and do it clean.
 
vonfram88 said:
To be fair to the whipper snapper, he trains harder than I ever have and probably has a bigger chip (spite beats gear any day). I'm a lazy slob in the gym, and always have been. With a little revision to his program and proper harnessing of the attitude, he could be elite within five years and do it clean.
Click to expand...

I have no interest in being clean but yeah, MSIC rating without wraps and a 2h weigh in in my first 6 years of training is the goal. Year 4 starts this July 2014 and I am currently CMS rated. I got to CMS completely natural, despite what AusBB likes to think.

So 2.5 years, 100 point wilks increase is the aim. At 401 currently going by the maxes I using in my training and my current body weight, but that is without a belt as well
 
0ni said:
"Do starting strength"
"5/3/1 is great"
"PTC beginners"

oh boy.
Click to expand...


Funny thing is even though I am not the biggest fan of these programs. Every single one of them is easily capable of getting the average joe past an 80kg bench naturally.

So what does that tell you about where the problem lies ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top