Imagine taking a few people from the 50s who were pretty tall. Say about 6'4" and then extrapolating that humans cannot possible grow more than 6"7 naturally without GH. Stupid right?
Taking a few people and looking at their height just isn't enough when talking about massive populations like everyone alive today. The exact same thing can be said for bodybuilding in relation to muscle mass. Looking at a few dozen old time bodybuilders just isn't close to enough to determine genetic limits.
There is also an extreme selection factor here too. Make 10 000 people start bodybuilding, what's the probability of a random person in this group to really start to take it seriously? Ok, now take the person that is absolutely the most genetically gifted amongst these 10 000 and ask the question again. Of course, the person who discovers his immense talent is going to take it much more seriously than someone with a normal talent.
I saw many people on this sub being angry at Jeff Nippard for saying that being as big as Frank Zane is possible for people with an extreme genetic potential, but why? What data are you looking at that you can say that's impossible with such confidence?
If you'd ask me whether or not Jeff Nippard himself is taking steroids I would answer: maybe, but maybe not. I would not at all eliminate the possibility that someone has naturally achieved that level of physique and at the same time is working in fitness.
[link] [comments]
from Muscle and Bodybuilding http://bit.ly/2vTCCJU
via IFTTT
No comments:
Post a Comment