August 2006 Archive

By Tom Venuto, CSCS

Wouldn’t it be great if there was a safe and natural way to build more muscle in a shorter period of time? In this day and age of exercise gimmicks and quick fix solutions, most smart bodybuilders would be skeptical if they heard such a claim. But guess what? Such an “animal” really does exist. No, it’s not a drug. It’s not some miracle supplement, either. Nor is it a newfangled piece of workout machinery. If you’ve been training seriously for any length of time, it’s something you’re probably already familiar with, but haven’t fully exploited to the maximum degree. What is this method for building more muscle in less time? Surprise, surprise; it’s called supersetting!

Even if you’ve used supersets before, you may not be familiar with all the different types of supersets or the many ways you can incorporate them into your workouts. Just in case you’re not familiar with supersets, let me start from the beginning and explain the difference between a conventional set and a superset.

Conventional weight training is done using “straight sets.” A straight set consists of a series of nonstop repetitions, usually somewhere between 6 and 12, followed by a brief rest interval of about a minute. A superset is an advanced training technique where you perform two exercises in a row with virtually no rest in between exercises. Supersets are an excellent technique for muscular development, especially if you are short on time. Supersets are not, however, the most effective technique for building strength. Let me explain why...

When you perform two exercises in a row with no rest in between, this will reduce the amount of weight you can handle, particularly on the second movement. Your strength will also decrease from fatigue with each subsequent superset. Because supersets don’t allow you to use maximal weights, they are not well-suited to building strength. Supersets are definitely a body building and “shaping” technique. You seldom see powerlifters or strength athletes doing supersets. In fact, they usually do the opposite; they take longer rest intervals between sets so that they can recuperate as much as possible. After a 3-5 minute recovery period, you can attack each set with maximum strength. If you are still fatigued from the previous set and you start another set too soon, you won't be able to lift as much weight.

Now that you know what supersets are, the question is; why should you even bother using them? There are three primary advantages supersets have over conventional straight sets:

1. Supersets save time. The most obvious advantage of supersetting is to save time. Even if you truly enjoy training, it’s probably safe to assume that you wouldn’t mind getting equal or better results in a shorter period of time. By eliminating the rest intervals between sets (when you would normally be doing nothing), you can finish your workout in a fraction of your usual time

2. Supersets increase intensity. Usually when you think of high intensity, you think of forced reps, descending sets, and negatives. Supersets are simply another method of increasing intensity. Shortening the rest between sets is hard work – especially if you’re used to a long rest interval. The principle is: more work performed in less time equals more intensity and more intensity equals more muscle.

3. Supersets help prevent injury or allow you to work around an injury. I stumbled onto the value of supersets as a way to train around injuries at the age of 20 when I ruptured a disc in my lower back. I was a strong squatter at a very young age, doing 405 lbs for 6 reps before I was 20 years old. After the injury, I wanted to maintain my leg size without putting so much stress on my lower back. Because I could no longer squat more than 315 lbs. without re-injuring my back, out of necessity, I started doing supersets and higher reps. After a relatively brief period training with supersets, my quads quickly grew to become my best body part. With the exception of brief strength phases when I do straight sets with as much weight as I can, I utilize supersets extensively for quads to this day. Supersets allow you to overload a muscle and generate high intensity without requiring heavy weights. This decreases your chances of injury and allows you to work around existing injuries.

There are three primary categories of supersets: 1) same muscle group, 2) agonist-antagonist and 3) staggered sets. Let's take a look at each category and a few examples of each.

1. Same muscle group. The first and most common way to superset is to combine two exercises for the same muscle group. An example would be supersetting dumbbell flyes with bench presses.

Within the “same muscle group” superset category there are four sub-categories: pre-exhaust, post-exhaust, compound and isolation. Each one has a slightly different effect:

a) Pre-exhaust. Pre-exhaustion is probably the best known and most effective type of superset of all. A pre exhaust superset is performed by choosing two exercises for the same muscle group; an isolation exercise first, followed by a basic, compound movement.

The idea behind pre-exhaust supersets is to take a muscle group beyond the normal point of exhaustion and thereby achieve muscle fiber stimulation and growth that you could not achieve from a straight set. Here's how this works: Suppose you are doing a set of leg extensions for your thighs and you push yourself until you can't do another rep. Most people think their legs are finished at this point and that they couldn't go further if they tried. The quadriceps muscles may indeed be completely exhausted - you couldn’t do another leg extension if you tried - but by walking over to the squat rack, you'll find that you are still able to do squats (albeit with a lighter poundage than usual). Why? Because even though the quadriceps reached total failure on the leg extensions, other lower body muscles used in a squat are still fresh and strong (glutes, hamstrings, adductors and different sections of the quadriceps group.) By "pre-exhausting" the target muscle with an isolated movement you can then continue to blast the fatigued muscle even further with the help of the assisting muscles in the compound movement.

The only drawback with pre exhaust supersets is that you will only be able to use a fraction of your normal weight on the second exercise. Let’s say you can normally squat with 315 for 10 reps when you do the exercise first. When you switch the order and do leg extensions first, you might find that your quads are so fried from the leg extensions that even 225 lbs. for 10 reps on the squat is difficult. That's ok when it comes to muscle growth, but if your goal is power or strength then this would be counter productive. If strength is your primary goal, it would be better to stick with straight sets of squats and to do your squats first. In a periodized training schedule for a bodybuilder, straight sets should be used almost exclusively during the off season strength and mass phase. Supersets would then be added later during the pre-contest “cutting” phase.

Here are some examples of pre-exhaust superset combinations:

Isolation exercise (1st) Compound Exercise (2nd) Leg Extension Squat Leg Curl Stiff Leg Deadlift Dumbbell Pullover Reverse grip lat pulldown Tricep Pushdown Close Grip Bench Press Dumbell Flyes Barbell Bench Press Dumbell Side Lateral Raise Military Press Barbell Curl Curl grip pullups

b) Post-exhaust. The opposite of pre exhaust is post exhaust. In a post exhaust superset you would again choose a basic compound movement and an isolation movement. This time, however, you would perform the compound movement first and the isolation movement second. The advantage of the post exhaust superset is that you will be fresh on the compound movement so you can use more weight. Post exhaust supersets can also be used as an effective variation on the heavy-light system. For example, instead of just doing the regular sets of 8-12 reps, choose a heavy basic movement for the first exercise and do about 6 reps. Then, follow it with a lighter isolation movement and go for 20 reps. This gives you the best possible of both worlds: a) size and strength increase, and b) isolation with a wicked pump. Compound Exercise (1st) Isolation Exercise (2nd) Leg Press Leg Extension Incline Bench Press Incline Dumbbell Flyes Military Press Dumbbell side lateral raise Close Grip bench press Rope Pushdowns Stiff Leg Deadlift Leg Curl

c) Compound superset. This type of superset is reserved for very brave people. Supersetting two compound exercises together can create amazing muscle growth in a very short period of time, but it’s incredibly demanding and exhausting. It takes all the energy you can muster to get through a series of compound supersets. It is also very taxing on the nervous system and requires that special attention be paid to recovery after the session. An example would be supersetting squats with leg presses. Combinations like these can easily leave you lying flat on your back gasping for air, but the results are well worth it! Compound Exercise #1 Compound Exercise #2 Squats Leg Press Bent Over Barbell Rows Deadlifts

NOTE: A word of caution about pre exhaust and compound supersets: If your second exercise is a compound free weight movement that requires a great deal of neuromuscular coordination or is the type of exercise that requires a spotter, pay extra attention to your form. When your prime movers are fatigued from the first exercise, you may feel “wobbly” and your form is much more likely to break in the second exercise. If you let your form become sloppy because you are fatigued, you are more likely to get injured. It’s not uncommon for pre-fatigued muscles to give out suddenly without warning. If this happens during a bench press or squat and you don’t have a spotter or safety mechanism in place, the results could be disastrous. A safer method, especially if you’re a beginner, is to select a movement for the second exercise that requires less skill and coordination (leg press, smith machine squat, hack squat) or one with a built in safeguard (power rack, safety catch, spotter, etc).

d) Isolation supersets. The fourth and final way to do a same muscle group superset is to superset two isolation exercises, such as cable crossovers and dumbbell flyes. This is a useful technique for isolating one particular muscle group or section of a muscle group to the exclusion of others. It is used most often during pre-contest or definition phases when mass and strength are no longer the primary concerns.

Isolation Exercise #1 Isolation Exercise #2 Dumbell Flyes Cable Crossover Leg Extension Sissy Squat

Ok, now that you know all four types of same muscle group supersets, let's take a look at the other two categories of supersets: antagonistic supersets and staggered supersets.

2. Antagonistic muscle groups. When you do two exercises in a row for the same muscle group, it tends to significantly limit the amount of weight you can use because of fatigue and lactic acid buildup. Pairing opposing (antagonistic) muscle groups together can help you keep your strength up because as one muscle is working, the opposite one is resting. Common examples include pairing biceps with triceps, chest with back, or hamstrings with quadriceps. This is also an excellent technique for bringing up lagging body parts (priority training). Antagonistic supersets are most popular as a technique for blasting the arms. For example, barbell curls paired with Tricep pushdowns are a great combination. Supersetting biceps and triceps together can create monstrous pumps that make your arms feel like they’re about to explode!

Exercise #1 Exercise #2 Barbell Curls Tricep Pushdown Leg Extension Leg Curl Barbell Row Bench Press

3. Staggered sets. The final category of supersetting is staggered sets. A staggered set is a type of superset where you combine a major muscle with a minor and completed unrelated muscle. This technique is most commonly used for abs and calves. The way you utilize this principle is to “squeeze in” a set of abs or calves in between sets for any major muscle group. For example, you could throw in a set of calves in between every set of chest you do. Instead of resting and doing nothing in between sets of chest, you are doing something productive - working your calves! This gets your workout finished much more quickly and spares you the monotony that many people feel from doing these small body parts by themselves.

As you can see, many benefits can be gained from including supersets in your training program. They are a proven technique for increasing intensity and bringing up lagging body parts. They allow you to gain muscle while working around injuries that might be aggravated with heavy weights. If your training program is getting stale, supersets can also help relieve your boredom. Best of all, supersetting is a legitimate way to get more results in less time. If you need to squeeze a result-producing workout into a short period of time, then supersets could be the answer to your muscle-building prayers!

Click image for more Kathy Johansson

From http://www.addictions.co.uk

For some people, exercise can become compulsive, to a degree which is as physically, psychologically and emotionally destructive as ingesting chemicals. Like other addictions (gambling, work, alcohol), the need to compulsively exercise is informed by a range of motivations. These can include avoidance, mood manipulation, a desire to control, and as a general method of coping with life.

How common is it?
Exercise addiction is rare but may be on the increase as exercise patterns change, particularly as exercise is culturally acceptable, even admired. It is widely believed that exercise addiction is linked to the eating disorder anorexia nervosa, which affects approximately 1% of the population.

How do I know if I have it?
The feeling of having to exercise interferes with all aspects of a person’s life. All addictions are progressive. Increasingly, exercise can become the ‘organising principle’ in the persons life at the expense of non exercise activities - relationships, family, work etc. There may be heightening anticipation/preoccupation and an increasing need to create exercise “opportunities”. This is so despite the diminishing efficiency of the behaviour - the addictive ‘high’ becomes progressively less available and depression, anxiety, social/emotional isolation, sleep disturbance become symptomatic. The addict will progressively become devious, defensive and secretive in pursuing/increasing exercise opportunities. The addict will rationalise and justify to safeguard what is increasingly becoming pathological behaviours.

Can it be cured?
The addiction ‘cycle’ dictates that, in attempting to cope with these problems, the person will more actively and purposefully engage in addictive behaviour. From the addicts perspective, it can seem impossible to arrest this cycle without assistance. Chronic exercise addiction can be a severely debilitating condition meriting clinical intervention, even hospitalisation.

Click image for gallery

From Tanuki:
I've been a fan of strong women since around 1963 or so, when the Beatles came on the music scene, around when JFK was assassinated, Vietnam was firing up. There wasn't any official women's bodybuilding then. Just circus performers and athletes with exceptionally powerful physiques. I'd look around my elementary school class and try to guess which girl would get buff when she got older. I imagined who would win in a fight between various pairs of girls and boys. Yes, I was a nut even then. As I got older and my hormones prompted me toward breeding, studhood, and servitude, I looked for those same girls I'd chosen as most likely to kick ass. But, they'd changed a lot. Nature and society had joined in foiling my vision of super womanhood. Man was I frustrated!

Around the time Pumping Iron was released in the mid 1970's, a new mix of social confluences were at work. Mainly affirmative action, the breakdown of the traditional family, freedom in sex and divorce, and the consequent financial self-determination of the American woman. Women's bodybuilding, as well as discotheques, came out of nowhere. I was happy about that, naturally. I thought it was sexy and healthy at the same time. Why shouldn't women's muscles be esteemed as well as men's? I moved to California and joined Gold's Gym (no longer owned by Joe in 1980) in Santa Monica so I could meet Gail what's-her-name (sorry, I lusted after you and your big legs but was too shy to introduce myself), who was also a member (along with Lou F., Grant, oh, I've forgotten all their names. Arnold had just left). Gail what's-her-name used to run down Ocean Blvd. One day I heard she was hit by a truck, but I think she was all right. Around that time I had to quit Gold's.

So the FBB machine wound up to become moderately popular during the 1980's and some women could make a modest living modeling in magazines, promoting Weider products (I worked for Joe Weider in Canoga Park for about six months in 1980). But I still saw some of the "stars" working at health food stores and gyms. I think Janice Regain worked at the Santa Monica Mall at that time, but I could be wrong about who that was.

During the 80's, Reagan, computers, globalization, terrorism, economic downsizing, well, you know, the yuppy was born and competition replaced brotherly love in America (now called The US). Marriage and the family blew sky high, and women had to find work. Good paying work.

Now, here's where I'm hazy (I haven't read at all on this subject, maybe somebody can straighten me out).

It seems FBBing was split at some point between more traditional beauty and the traditional BB aesthetic, so fitness and BB contests became separate entities. I thought contest judges were reinforcing the stereotypes for a while, but, thankfully, that stopped, and really big women started to win. To me, that's what it's about. Building as much muscle in balanced proportion as possible, and being able to carry it gracefully. (Well, a lot of the guys weren't/aren't very graceful, I have to admit. But that was the ideal, anyway.)

Steroid use exploded in the 1980's (and I imagine 1990's), and what was a gal who wanted to devote her life to the BB aesthetic do? But to take them, too, in order to compete and make money. The square jaws, receding hairlines, etc. must've turned a lot of potential converts away from the BB life. Girls who could've had wonderful muscular development repulsed by the socially unacceptable she hulk. I really don't have anything against "She Hulk". I used to read the comic book, when it was good (in the mid-1970's). I even liked she was green. Green people are interesting, in a way, just because they're green. Same with massively buff women. If there were more green people, and massive women, I think people would get used to it. It wouldn't be as interesting then, perhaps, but I think it would be a good thing. I think role reversal is healthy, too. I know some single fathers, and male home makers, too. I wish some massively buff woman would sweep me up and make me her little man. Whatever. I'm not holding my breath. At 51, I'm a little discouraged.

Anyway, back to Fannie. This is what I think. She very well may have died as the result of physical complications arising from, or accelerated by, the use of steroids. This site is great for it's vigilance. Was an autopsy performed? Please report as facts arise! Even back in the day, I thought bodybuilding contests to be potentially corrupt for the individual. I think the true accomplishment of the individual bodybuilder isn't in his or her appearance, but rather their strength, discipline, and personal well-being--which then expresses itself in the physical appearance. I don't mean to dismiss the beauty of balance and proportion, of shape and size. Just to wonder that, as so much of our hyper-mediated world is obsessed with, and fooled by, appearances, has this same type of superficiality undermined the bodybuilder ethic and lifestyle that held such promise, particularly for females, of a strong, healthy physical self determination? Has it become a freak show instead? Well, PT Barnum made a buck or two on freak shows, so that's not new. But it wouldn't be healthy for society if everyone were in the circus, would it. Please have a great respect for your Self, and take care of it. It's wrong to throw it away!

I do think genetic engineering will eventually render this topic meaningless--in so far as the physical process is concerned. I believe people will use that technology to change, and hopefully improve, the human mind and body. In the meantime, what can we do? I love strong women, and the way they look. I also want them to be whoever they wish to be, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone or infringe unfairly on another's freedom or happiness. If Fannie and others have died or wrecked their health because of steroids, it's more than just sad. It undermines the fragile interactive human condition. And it's not what I had in mind all those years ago. I feel very good about the progress toward equality with men women are making all over the world. If these relatively primitive chemicals are seriously unhealthy, their use is a setback for everybody involved; the users and the people who care about them. The cause of women's equality is also damaged, because it's ultimately freedom and happiness, that are at stake.

I'm also not a fan of the ubiquitous breast implant. For breast cancer victims and the like it makes sense, but everyday people? They don't look so 'everyday' anymore. Suddenly, and probably unwittingly, they join the freak show. Like steroids, installing liquid-filled plastic bags into your chest, is woefully primitive. It so caters to the infantile obsessions of sexually-repressed males, and their female counterparts. Please try to be as natural as possible!

So, like many elderly people, I associate this type of thing with "the way the world is going". I also consider this "freak show" phenomenon to be a temporary regression in a generally positive improvement in social conditions for women. There have always been strong women. Many, many women have equaled and even dominated their male counterparts in countless ways. The determination of females to be as physically strong as possible isn't new. But the personal and social symbols of such strength, the psychology of it, has exponentially grown and transformed both genders in one fell swoop. It's a fact; women can be very strong indeed. We're still reeling from this rapid development. Girls and women's team sports are quickly maturing into significant socio-economic entities. Self defense skills are common. More importantly, knowledge and awareness are prevalent. What good is a strong body without the ability to appreciate and enjoy it? To put it to good purpose. To integrate one's self into the whole while maintaining individuality--to realize that to help someone helps everyone, and to hurt someone hurts everyone.

Okay, so I'm rambling. Women are surely becoming what I'd dreamed they would. And the female BB is a wonderful example. She is really something to me (even though I'm too old and beat up to fully enjoy her, myself). I had some doubts, some cynicism, too, about the result of this female self-determination. But I somehow remain optimistic. I believe bodybuilders will eventually take a more healthful course. It may require scientific breakthroughs to happen, but I don't think steroids will mean much in fifty years. I hope not. That's just like one tiny step in a journey of light years to our 'destinations', so we'd better get going. Fannie, I guess, is already there.

She has become the first Brazilian Bodybuilder female, to receive a Pro Card of the International Federation of Bodybuilders (IFBB) the main world federation for this sport.

Monica has been involved in many other sports throughout her life: Cycling, Martial Arts, Gymnastics among others, this activities set her physical base, but she started lifting weights in1986 as part of her training, it took many years for her decide to take on competitive Bodybuilding. It was in 1994 when she successfully competed for the first time wining every: State, Inter-State, Regional and Nationals twice and Bodybuilding championships like South-American and Iberia-American championships. The next step for her was the World Amateur Woman's & Mixed Pairs Bodybuilding Championships, reaching the 4th spot.

In January 1998, she finally earned her Pro Card due her condition of number one in her country and the continent, and her many national and international victories, which opened the doors for competing in top bodybuilding contests as a professional athlete.

Currently she competes in high profile North American stages and has entered in the spotlight of the Bodybuilding media, appearing in specialized magazines like Flex, Musclemag,Women's Physique World, Ironman...Part of the attention she gets from the observers are her exotic and flashy looks, nice ripped condition, as well as her excellent legs: perfectly shaped and razor sharp thighs and calves with a good muscle size, which make the greatest impact in the eyes of the fans. Since her lower body is considered one of the bests in the sport, it used to overpower the upper side, affecting her overall symmetry and stopping from placing higher in professional events.

Besides her training for top professional events like Ms. International, Jan Tana, placing Brazil in the top spots of this sport, when she used to live there she was active promoter of bodybuilding in many states of her country, already enjoying a relatively good popularity there.

Name: Monica Martin

Place of Birth: Brazil Date: December 26 (Capricorn)

Occupation: Personal Trainer, Formed in University to Physical Education and fitness model.

Bodybuilding background: Been competing since 94, turned pro in 98.

Monica's favorite body parts to train: Her legs and calves

Height: 5'4" Weight: 145L-off season/135L-pre-contest

Hair: Black Eyes: Grey

MEASUREMENTS:

CHEST 38 C
BICEPS 15 inch
WAIST 26inch
HIPS 35 inch
QUADS 25 inch
CALVES 17 1/2 inch

BEST LIFTS:

BB SQUATS 160K
LEG PRESS 500K
BB OR DB PRESS 120K
BICEP CURLS 60K

FAVORITE COLOURS: Black, Blue, White.
FAVORITE PERFUME: Reyane
FAVORITE FLOWER: Sunflower, Chrysanthemum and Orchid.
FAVORITE ACTOR/ACTRESS: Al Pacino, Sophia Loren
FAVORITE MOVIE: I like Matrix .
KIND OF MUSIC: I like classic rock, pop, 70&80, some jazz, soul, instrumental, Brazilian music, classic ( I love Bach)
BEST BOOK: Adonai by jorge Adoum)
FAVORITE FOOD: Oats for breakfast, sushi & sashimi for lunch or dinner, ice cream, cookies an cakes (I love sweet things in general)
HOBBIES: see movies, walk in the museum and art galleries, listen music, roller blade , cuisine, sew, cycling, martial arts, travel

LIKES: to use my imagination, learn new things, honesty, true friendship, gentleness, cleverness, polite and intelligent people
DISLIKES:dumbness, selfishness, hypocrisy, lies, gossips, envy, cheats, profiteurs and opportunists

HOW CAN YOU BEST DESCRIBE YOURSELF AND YOUR FUTURE PLANS I like to help people to find them style I can say I have a sharp vision for that, I feel pretty happy with myself outside and inside( I mean in the good ways) I have a strong personality , passionate, I like to be honest with my feelings if I think something I have to say, I love my friends, I like to be perfectionist in everything what I do . My future plan is to have my own business and have my mom living with me.

WHAT IS YOUR MOTTO "The best challenge is win yourself"

Via Dolfzine.com
by Rick Collins

MEMO TO HIGH SCHOOLS: You have a problem. Anabolic steroids are becoming the rage among teens.

They are undeterred by the risks of high blood pressure, heart disease, liver damage, cancers, strokes and blood clots and headaches and cramps and nausea and baldness and acne and sterility and increased breast size in males, shrunken testicles, stunted growth and many more.-- Doug Robinson, "No sweat? Teens are swept up in roid rage," Deseret News, June 11, 2002.

"Scare tactics don't work." -- Asa Hutchinson, DEA chief, "Dennis Miller Live," August 1, 2002

I guess some journalists didn't get the DEA memo before sending out their own? Scare tactics have failed abysmally, but those in the mainstream media keep churning out hyperbolic drivel like this all the time. It suits them fine. Cheating Olympians and juiced-up sports stars provoke public disapproval, but the idea of our nation's teens abusing anabolic steroids is rightfully appalling to the public, including most parents. Journalists know this, and the problem of teenage steroid abuse has received tremendous media attention.

Big Muscles are Great...
Long Jail Sentences...
are not!!!

What the Stats Say

What is the percentage of teens using steroids? According to the 2001 Monitoring the Future survey, 2.8% of 8th graders, 3.5% of 10th graders, and 3.7% of 12th graders reported using steroids at least once in their lives. Obviously that's troubling. But as compared to the previous year, the 2001 number was down for 8th graders and exactly the same for 10th graders. The number of 12th graders who reported ever using steroids went up, but only from less than three out of one hundred to less than four out of one hundred students.

Let's compare these figures to teen cocaine use. Significantly more 8th and 10th graders reported ever using cocaine or LSD than steroids, and the number of 12th graders who reported using cocaine at least once during their lifetime was 8.2% -- more than twice the number who had ever used steroids. The number of 12th graders who reported using LSD at least once during their lifetime was 10.9% -- nearly triple the number who had ever used steroids. And what about alcohol, which is responsible for the deaths of more than 6,000 teen drivers annually (data from the National Safety Council)? Yes, that's six thousand kids killed behind the wheel in alcohol-related collisions every year. The number of 12th graders who reported being drunk at least once was a truly alarming 63.9%, with a higher increase over the past year than the increase seen with steroids.

These statistics are not intended to minimize in any way the social problem presented by teen steroid use, or teen drug use in general. It's simply to put things in the proper perspective and to hopefully put a damper on enacting any overbroad, reactionary laws. Adolescent steroid use is undeniably a problem, and as mature adults we ought to be doing more about it.

Assessing the Seriousness of the Problem

We can and should recite for our teens the traditional list of possible steroid side effects that are presented to all users, but we should present only the real risks, not some hyperbolic "Reefer Madness" version that destroys all credibility. While the media have exaggerated and sensationalized steroid side effects, there are potentially serious side effects even to adults. The true potential for health risks should not be ignored, but rather qualified. While Legal Muscle includes an exhaustive look at the medical literature related to steroid side effects, a brief recitation of the concerns is crucial here.

Liver toxicity is the foremost adverse effect on the laundry list of potential health risks associated with anabolic steroids. The serious liver problems attributed to anabolic steroid use include hepatocellular carcinoma (liver cancer) and peliosis hepatitis (blood-filled sacs within the liver). But while serious liver problems are often cited in the media as a common result of steroid use, it's a classic case of telling the truth without telling the whole truth. It's certain oral steroids -- ones that are "C-17 alpha alkylated" -- that are unusually stressful to process. Even moderate short-term administration of these particular steroids can affect liver function test readings. But contrary to public belief, injectable steroids -- which are more popular among bodybuilders than oral steroids -- generally have little if any effect upon liver function. Since adverse liver effects are associated almost exclusively with C-17 alpha alkylated steroids, studies that generalize these effects to all anabolics are misleading at best. [Note: although the dangers of anabolics to healthy mature adult males' livers appear to have been exaggerated, it must be recognized that an apparently healthy subject with a previously existing but undiscovered liver problem could do serious damage by self-administering C-17 alkylated anabolic steroids.]

Cardiac risk and adverse cholesterol changes are also concerns. Again, there is a legitimate risk with regard to the C-17 oral steroids in particular, which seem to affect blood lipid levels, causing a reduction in HDL (high-density lipoproteins, the "good" cholesterol) levels in some steroid users, as well as an increase in LDL (low-density lipoproteins, the "bad" cholesterol).

As weight gain and water retention can result from anabolic steroid use, hypertension can result. But while hypertension is often cited as a confirmed consequence of anabolic steroid usage, reports indicate that high blood pressure is perhaps one of the most exaggerated claims of steroid-related health risks.

Taking exogenous male hormones can cause the shutdown of endogenous production, making the testicles decrease in size. Basically, like skeletal muscles, the testes can get small and soft if not used. This effect has been a favorite of steroid scaremongers and has been widely reported in the media. However, widely popular ancillary medications can prevent this effect. Also, like impaired fertility, testicular shrinkage is generally fully reversible upon discontinuation of use.

Testosterone can be converted by enzymatic processes in the body into other hormones. One of these derivative hormones is called dihydrotestosterone (DHT), a steroid molecule that may be significantly responsible for certain adverse effects including male pattern baldness, acne, and prostatitis. The occurrence and extent of these adverse effects varies by the individual. For example, while steroids won't cause baldness, male pattern baldness can be exacerbated in individuals who already have a genetic predisposition to it.

Testosterone also has the capacity to be converted into female hormones by chemical reactions and enzymes within certain body tissues. Those anabolics that are easily converted into estrogen can cause a formation of female breast tissue known as gynecomastia. While largely dose related, a natural propensity for this condition can cause it to occur even at moderate dosages.

A few researchers have suggested that psychiatric symptoms including increased aggression are a common side effect of anabolic steroid use. But other experts have regarded the conclusions of these researchers with skepticism. In fact, anabolic steroid supplementation (testosterone enanthate) may actually decrease irritability, anger, sadness, tiredness and nervousness, while increasing energy levels, friendliness and good feelings in hypogonadal men. Not surprisingly, when psychiatric problems do occur in study subjects, there seems to be a direct correlation between dosage and prevalence of syndromes.

It has been suggested that anabolic steroid use in conjunction with intense weight training causes muscular adaptations that outpace adaptations by the connective tissues, leading to injuries. Moreover, in light of the extreme degree of musculoskeletal stress imposed, it is not unreasonable to expect muscle and tendon tears in hardcore strength athletes, regardless of steroid use. Whether these injuries are steroid-related is as yet unknown, although some animal studies have suggested that steroids may cause tendon degeneration and increased risk of tendon rupture.

Today, many authorities concede that we really don't know much about the long-term effects of high-dose anabolic use. Massive amounts of anabolics may well have unknown long-term adverse effects. But we don't have any proof of it. Further, the existing risks are increased when the products are obtained on the black market, and when use is unsupervised.

In addition to the risks for adults, steroid use prior to puberty or in adolescence can cause premature closure of the growth plates of the long bones, preventing the young user from attaining full natural height. Although looking good on the beach right now sounds good, even the most thick-headed teen can see the advantage in being a few inches taller a couple years from now.

Additionally, new research on animals conducted at Northeastern University suggests that steroid use in adolescents may permanently alter brain chemistry, whereas the mental effects on adult users typically subside following cessation of use (BBC News, August 16, 2002). Although this issue requires further research, this study provides support for the contention that introducing exogenous hormones to an endocrine system that has not yet fully developed can potentially have permanent and immediate consequences.

But the most dangerous aspect of teen steroid use may not be physiologically based at all. It's psychologically based: the potential for abuse. The teenage years are the peak period of insecurity for most of us; the time when we are most susceptible to peer pressure. Impatient and eager for fast results, many teens are less focused on the distant future including possible health consequences many years ahead. Plus, there's generally a big difference in the mentality of most forty-year-olds from that of most seventeen-year-olds. There ought to be, if you've learned from life. Maturity doesn't come overnight. Teen years are often colored with a higher level of recklessness, sporadic irresponsibility, and a pervasive feeling of invincibility: "The bad stuff will never happen to me." Remember thinking like that?

And, of course, teens are typically less inclined to admit their use to a disapproving physician. This leads to an increased risk of health consequences by failing to monitor blood pressure, cholesterol and cardiovascular health.

Further, the effects of anabolics upon size and strength are partially (and sometimes even completely) temporary. Teens seem particularly less willing to suffer these post-cycle size and strength reductions. Thus begins a vicious cycle resulting in a reluctance to ever "come off" the juice, which can lead to permanent health problems. A dangerous reliance on steroids can develop, as the only perceived way to build muscle and the only incentive to go to the gym. I've seen some young people who give up training entirely when they're not "on cycle."

Add it all together and you have all the ingredients for disaster: a high propensity for uninterrupted usage at dangerously high dosages without medical supervision. Even the regulars at hardcore steroid discussion boards on the Internet oppose and vigorously discourage teen use, as did the late Dan Duchaine, author of the Underground Steroid Handbook II (1989) and a favorite target of the anti-steroid brigade. Clearly, even in countries where they can be legally obtained without a prescription, the choice to use anabolics for physical enhancement should be made by mature, informed adults with a pre-established dedication to serious weight training.

Many teen steroid users find parents who lecture them on steroid use ludicrous on several levels. First, the parents often spout off what they've read in the mainstream media, and the kids know better. Second, teenagers tend to be sensitive to hypocrisy, and are apt to dismiss a health risk lecture from a coach or parent who smokes cigarettes or drinks to excess. (And, quite frankly, between us, they have a point. It's tough to get preachy until you clean up your own act. If your teen is using steroids, it may be a perfect opportunity to reevaluate your own poor health habits.) I've spent enough time talking to teens in gyms across the country to know that trying to scare the bejesus out of them will only serve to make us look foolish. The same will go for you if you try it. For one thing, some of these teens may know more about the real health risks than you do. The approach to take to discourage teen steroid use, I am convinced, is one of honesty.

The Underestimated Value of Honesty
A few years ago, I overheard a nineteen-year-old college student quietly asking about steroids at a local health club I used to frequent. He weighed about 160 pounds. I only heard snippets of his gripes, but basically he was complaining about his lack of progress and was looking to boost his muscle gains with anabolics. I shook my head as I continued my own workout. When I finished my set, he asked for my opinion. What follows is what I told him. If I had a teenaged son, it's what I'd tell him, too.

Steroids May Work
But So Does The
Prison System

The way I see it, most everything has risks and benefits. That's especially true of medications, such as anabolic steroids. The choice of whether or not to take steroids involves weighing the risks against the benefits. The risks for teens include numerous possible side effects, including the possibility of altering brain chemistry and never growing to the height you should have been. Have the risks been exaggerated in healthy adult males? Absolutely. Lots of people have taken steroids and seem fine, even many years later. But a few have gotten very sick. Using certain types of steroids can screw up your liver. Using too much can have all sorts of negative effects. And that's not even addressing the fact that most black market products are made for animals and are of unknown purity. There's always some doubt as to what exactly is going into your body. And whose advice are you taking as to dosages and cycles? What are his credentials? Shouldn't a physician be involved in the administration of any serious medicine? What if you have a hidden health problem you may not be aware of, like high blood pressure, liver or prostate disease, or a small undiscovered cluster of cancer cells? After all, we really don't know all of the long-term effects. Is it worth the trade-off at this particular point in your life?

Further, there's another risk that nobody talks about much. Not in the future, but here and now. That's the legal risk of getting yourself busted. In many states, simple possession is a felony. I know -- I've represented a slew of personal users who got jammed up. You'll be handcuffed, interrogated, and treated like a criminal. You'll probably spend a night in jail, maybe with an overly friendly guy named Bubba. You'll probably wind up needing to call your parents to bail you out, and then needing to hire a lawyer and go to court and see a judge, maybe a bunch of times. Your parents will foot the bill, and they'll never let you forget it for the rest of your life. If you're in a small town, the local papers may print your name, which happened to three teen juicers in Utah recently. You probably won't go to jail in the end, although you might! Maybe you'll be lucky and just get probation, but that puts a huge crimp into your social schedule, believe me. If you're convicted of a felony, you can lose many valuable civil rights including your basic right to vote. Even if you're just convicted of a misdemeanor drug offense, you can lose some very important privileges including the license to drive your car and the opportunity to receive federal financial aid for college. Your folks will really love you for that, huh?

Word will probably get around about your arrest. Your teachers will see you differently, as will your neighbors. The girls at school won't think you're cool. They'll see you as a cheater. In fact, they'll attribute any muscles you have purely to the steroids. They'll disregard any hard work you may have put in at the gym. In their eyes, you'll be a lazy kid who cheated with some chemicals that made him bigger, and they will probably be right. You didn't pay your dues.

At nineteen, you're technically an adult and can make up your own mind, but are the benefits really worth it? The way I see it, to really get the benefits, you're going to need to take more steroids than an older guy. Why? Because your own natural testosterone levels are really high right now as suggested by your acne. Once you take in synthetic testosterone from outside, your own natural production shuts off. It can go to zero pretty fast. You'll need a lot of juice just to get you up to where you were to begin with. An older guy, whose levels have gone down over the years, might double his natural levels by taking half of what you'd need just to break even. Studies have shown that testosterone levels of teenaged boys can jump to as high as 2,000 nanograms per deciliter of blood -- about two to four times of your typical adult. How can you really justify not taking advantage of the highest natural testosterone levels you'll ever have in your life? How can you justify just shutting them down? The kids who start juicing without having built any natural foundation get big fast and then get small again just as fast when the cycle ends, like a yo-yo.

If you were 200 pounds and 35 years old, I'd agree your potential for further gains after years of training might be pretty much expended. But that's not you. You haven't even scratched the surface of your natural potential. Look at you. If you need steroids to break the 160-pound barrier, take up tennis. You could easily gain twenty pounds without touching anything that might get you busted. I'll bet your training stinks, your diet stinks, and you haven't even begun to pay the necessary dues of hard work. You want fast results? At your age, this is probably the only time in your life that you'll be able to get them without juice. Milk it for all it's worth. Revamp your training, start eating right, and stop asking people about steroids at nineteen years old.

Did I get through to him? Yes, at least for now. I gave him an exercise program and a sound nutrition plan. He's now training consistently four days each week with brief but intense workouts and heavy basic movements, hitting each body part once per week. He's also increased his protein intake to one gram for each pound of his body weight, not most days but every day. He's cut out the junk food, is consuming healthy fats, and is eating six small meals each day. He's making progress, and he's decided to forego juicing up and instead give his body's own resources a chance to work for him. Contrary to the views of the sports establishment's "Ministry of Truth" scaremongers, honesty and sound reasoning can work better than scare tactics and lies.

Perhaps there's hope for more effective approaches to the problem even at the institutional level. ATLAS (Athletes Training and Learning to Avoid Steroids) is a drug prevention program designed for high school male athletes. Initiated in 1993, the curriculum utilizes a "highly scripted" hands-on-approach, with interactive activities and role-playing. A unique feature of the program is the use of an influential coach and peer leaders as facilitators in a team setting. In addition to ten, 45-minute classroom sessions, there are three exercise sessions in the weight room. Regrettably, the fact that the National Institute on Drug Abuse funds the program suggests that at least a portion of it may be devoted to the same old scare tactics, which perpetuate the public acceptance of prosecuting mature adult personal users. On the other hand, the more positive aspects of the program involving diet and exercise seem to show promise. The program claims to have reduced the new steroid usage of participants by 50%.

At the individual level, parents need to know their children and be alert to significant behavioral changes, steroid-related or not. If you have suspicions or concerns about possible steroid use by your teen, a good primer may be found in J.E. Wright and V.S. Cowart, Anabolic Steroids: Altered States (Carmel, IN: Benchmark Press, 1990), Chapter 4, "Recognizing Anabolic Steroid Use in Adolescents," 71 -91. Some steroid users may benefit from behavioral therapy or other counseling to diminish future usage, particularly where the use arises out of extraordinarily low self-esteem or so-called "body dysmorphia" issues.

Wrap-Up

Now here's the message to pass on to teens: Before you even think about anabolic steroids, learn everything you possibly can about training and apply it in the gym. Become an authority on muscle-building nutrition, and eat right consistently. Pay your dues in the gym -- not for months, but for years -- while taking advantage of the highest natural testosterone levels you will ever have. When you reach your drug-free genetic potential, you'll be shocked at how far you've come.

Rick Collins, J.D., is a veteran lawyer and advisor to the strength, health and fitness communities, and is a nationally recognized legal authority on anabolic steroids. He actively serves on numerous bar associations, including the New York State Bar Association Executive Committee on criminal justice, and is a frequent author and lecturer. A knowledgeable weight trainer for over 25 years, he is a former bodybuilding competitor and certified personal trainer. This article was adapted from a chapter of LEGAL MUSCLE: Anabolics in America, available through SteroidLaw.com, and 1-800-525-6758. [© Rick Collins, 2003. All rights reserved. For informational purposes only, not to be construed as legal advice.]

The many (sexy!) looks of Christine Roxx

Click image for gallery

A timeless question, and a timely answer!

Your Questions Answered By Tom Venuto

Question: Do you believe that women like myself, at the age of 43, can firm up just as much as girls at 20 or 30 years of age? I don't need to lose weight, although I would like to believe that by sticking to proper training and diet, I will be able to tone and tighten my thigh and buttock areas. I would really appreciate your honest opinion. Thanks.

Answer: Honestly, it may be a little harder if you're starting at 40 or 50 for the first time ever. People who have been working out their entire lives have a "head start" and that's a decided advantage.

However, I have seen some absolutely amazing success stories from men and women in their 40, 50's, 60's, 70's and even beyond! Nearly every body building show these days has a masters division for age categories starting at 35 years old, and going as high as "grand masters" for ages 60 years and up. I know for a fact that many of these masters champions didn't even start working out until their 40's or 50's. Most people have no desire to become bodybuilders, but this example just goes to show that it can be done!

In fact, you will get stronger, leaner, healthier and see cosmetic improvements from training, no matter how old you are.

In his Boston research clinic, Dr. William Evans of Tufts University discovered that the muscles of older people are just as responsive to weight training as those of younger people. In his Book, "Biomarkers: the 10 keys to prolonging vitality," Dr. Evans wrote:

"A 12-week program of strength training using 60 and 70 year old men resulted not only in substantial increases in strength (their lifting ability went from 44 lbs. to 85 lbs.), but also in muscles that were larger and leaner with less fat in and around them. An 8-week study of 87 to 96 year old women confined to a nursing home showed that resistance exercise tripled their muscles strength and increased their size by 10 percent."

My suggestion is to avoid comparing yourself to 20 year olds, but don't set mental limitations on yourself either. You can and will see dramatic improvements in your body from working out regularly; simply make your goal to get better than yourself, not better than someone else half your age.

Download video preview HERE

Get Access to full video HERE

Your Questions Answered By Tom Venuto

Question: Please help me! I am a 27 year old female. I have been consistently weight and cardio training for over a year and although my upper body is looking good with nice definition, I have fat around my butt and the back of the top of my legs that just won't budge! I am doing a (very intense) 20 minute cardio session three days a week. I follow a vegan diet, low fat, with a protein supplement. I eat small amounts every 2-3 hours. Is it possible that not eating animal protein could be affecting my body fat? My body fat is currently at about 23%. Please tell me if there is anything I can do to help get rid of this fat area, or should I just accept it as genetics and focus on other parts of my body! Thank you in advance for your advice.

Answer: Do not just "accept it as genetics." Your genetic makeup will dictate how difficult it's going to be for you to lose fat or gain muscle; some people definitely have it easier than others. However, anyone can lose fat, even in the most stubborn and resistant areas. It's just a matter of adjusting your training and nutrition to your body type.

Unfortunately, some people have inherited metabolisms and body types that tend to favor fat storage. These people are called "endomorphs." Endomorphs may possess the following characteristics:

1) Slower metabolism
2) Very carbohydrate sensitive and/or insulin resistant
3) Tendency to gain fat easily if you eat poorly
4) Tendency to gain fat easily if you stop exercising
5) Tendency to hold on to stored fat and lose weight slowly,even on a "clean," low fat, low calorie diet.

If you have this type of body, you must adjust your training and nutrition accordingly and you may have to work harder than other people (I know - it's not fair!) First of all, three days of cardio a week for 20 minutes should be a bare minimum. For an endomorph, you'll need that much cardio just to maintain. To lose fat, you'll probably need 5 - 6 days per week of cardio at a minimum of 30-45 minutes per session. Go back to three days a week for maintenance only after you reach your goal.

Your nutritional strategy must lean towards higher protein (and slightly higher fat) with more moderate carbs. (Kind of like a "Zone" type diet.) This is necessary because most endomorphs tend to be carbohydrate sensitive. People with normal carbohydrate metabolisms can consume as much as 60% of their total calories from carbohydrates and stay lean, while endomorphs will tend to get fat eating this much carbohydrate, irrespective of caloric intake.

If you have already "cleaned up" your diet and you're eating low fat, low sugar, low calorie natural foods and it's still not working, then the next step would be to reduce your carb intake. Start by eating five small meals per day with the starchy carbs like oatmeal, whole grains, yams, potatoes, rice, etc eaten early in the day and only fibrous carbs like green vegetables and salads late in the day. (less carbs at night)

Every meal should contain a complete source of lean protein. You can definitely create complete proteins by combining complementary vegetable sources (rice and beans, etc), but my experience has shown that it is a little more challenging for vegetarians (especially pure vegans) to achieve that rock-hard, fat free look without the animal proteins.

Why don't you start by simply increasing your cardio first - that alone may do the trick. If not, then you may have to increase the protein and the "good" fats (Essential fatty acids like flaxseed oil, unprocessed vegetable oils, fish oil, nuts, seeds, peanut butter, etc). Personally, I do favor the animal proteins such as egg whites, chicken, turkey and fish, but any increase in protein and "good" fats at all will help you control insulin better and that in turn may help you lose that last bit of stubborn lower body fat.

Lori Braun, looking good in blue!

Click image for gallery

An answer to this "burning" question

By Tom Venuto

It's a scientifically proven fact that muscle proteins are broken down and used for energy during aerobic exercise. However, you are constantly breaking down and re-building muscle tissue anyway. This process is called "protein turnover." Your body is constantly alternating back and forth between anabolic (building) and catabolic (breaking down) cycles. That's just a normal part of life. Your goal is simply to tip the scales slightly in favor of increasing the anabolic side and reducing the catabolic side just enough so you stay anabolic and you gain muscle (or at least maintain it).

This fact of human physiology has often been taken out of context and used to scare people into not doing cardiovascular exercise for fear of losing muscle. When you fast overnight as you sleep, you lose muscle too, but that doesn't mean you should stop sleeping!

Sure, it's possible for you to lose muscle from doing too much cardio, but it's highly unlikely. Shying away from cardio completely because you think you'll lose muscle is a huge mistake. Only excessive amounts of cardio would cause you to lose muscle. Extreme amounts of aerobic work, such as the type of training done by competitive endurance athletes, could be considered over-training. Over-training tips the scale towards the catabolic side. Just look at the slight, wiry physiques of any distance runner or triathlete if you need proof of that. It's difficult to generalize and pinpoint one specific amount as too much, but a safe maximum guideline would be 45 -60 minutes of cardio a day, 6 to 7 days a week. Within these limits, you shouldn't worry about losing any muscle - as long as the proper nutritional support is provided. Beyond 60 minutes a day, you hit a point of diminishing returns and you may increase the chance of injury, over-training and muscle loss.

Trainer John Parillo has always been an advocate of lots of aerobics, even for his bodybuilder clients who are trying to gain muscle mass.

"Aerobics can enhance your recovery from weight training by promoting blood flow and oxygen transport to your muscles," says Parillo. "Aerobics forces oxygen through your body, increasing the number and size of your blood vessels. Blood vessels are the 'supply routes' that transport oxygen and nutrients to body tissues, including muscles, and carry waste products away for muscular growth, repair and recovery. The expansion of this circulatory network is called 'cardiovascular density.'"

So, according to Parillo, aerobics can actually enhance recovery from weight training and increase muscular growth by developing the circulatory pathways that provide nourishment to the muscles. Cardiovascular training is important for good health, for fat burning, and for muscle-building.

Losing muscle has more to do with inadequate diet than with excessive aerobics. If you suspect you are losing muscle there are four likely causes:

1. You are not eating enough protein. Protein is the only nutrient that can be used to build muscle. To stay on the anabolic side you must eat five to six protein containing meals every day. Each meal should be spaced out approximately three hours apart. Research has proven that if you are physically active, you need a minimum of .8 grams to 1 gram of protein per pound of body weight. Bodybuilders may need even more.

2. Your carbohydrates are too low. Low carb diets are often used for fat loss, but it is a mistake to cut your carbs too drastically. Carbohydrates are protein-sparing, so even if you are eating large amounts of protein, you can still lose muscle if your carbs are too low.

3. You are not eating enough calories to support muscle growth. This is actually the most probable cause of muscle loss. When your calories are too low, your body goes into "starvation mode." Your metabolism slows down and your body actually burns muscle tissue to conserve energy. Muscle is metabolically active tissue, requiring a great deal of caloric energy just to maintain it. That's why your body will shed muscle if it thinks you are starving.

4. You are not training with weights. It is a common misconception that if you want to lose weight, you should start with cardio only and add the weighs later - another big mistake! The weight training helps keep you from losing muscle while you are dieting.

You are much more likely to lose muscle from not eating enough than you are from doing too much cardio. All too often, people are afraid to eat a lot and do a lot of cardio at the same time. It doesn't seem to make sense. Logically, it appears that the two would cancel each other out, but the opposite is true. Many people believe they must "starve" the fat by drastically lowering calories. Unfortunately, this approach can cause you to lose muscle along with the fat. The only way to maintain your lean mass while losing fat is to feed the muscles with plenty of protein and nutritious calories while at the same time, burning the fat off with lots of cardio.

Whether your goal is muscle development, fat loss or both, you should always include some form of cardiovascular activity as part of your training program. Unless you're talking about some kind of ultra-endurance regimen, AEROBICS WILL NOT CAUSE MUSCLE LOSS. In fact, aerobics supports the pathways that help you build muscle.

* 2001 NPC National Fitness Championships - 1st Place Overall and Medium Class
* 2001 NPC Northwest Championships - 1st Place Fitness
* 2001 NPC Washington Ironman Championships - 1st Place Fitness
* 2001 Washington State Championships - 1st Place Fitness and Figure Overall
* 2001 Women's Tri-Fitness World Challenge - 5th Overall
* 2001 NPC Emerald Cup Figure Winner - Short Class
* 2000 Fitness America Nationals - Top 15 Finalist
* 2000 ESPN Series - Runner Up
* 2000 Fitness Texas Champion
* 2000 NPC Inland Pacific Fitness Champion
* 2001 NPC National Fitness Champion

Click image for gallery

By Kat Ricker

I do not understand anger in lifting.
There is no room for emotion in my work.
There is form, fiber direction, aligning the angle of resistance to the fibers. There is blood and oxygen filling the muscle. Core. Nerve activation, full muscular contraction...

Full range of motion, partial range, full contraction. Core. Eccentric work, the weight of the load as the muscle belly stretches out. Core. Soft knees, core stability, neutral spine, spinal stability - head, chest up, spinal alignment. Breathing. More air.

My awareness is inside, coursing through my blood like nutrients. If there is someone beside me, I do not know it. No other thoughts can survive. Emotion is out of the equation.

I release. Blood and lactic acid swell my limbs. My muscles thrum electric. Rush of elation, taste of bliss, sure fire of victory. Over and over.

As I leave the floor, the warm flood of victory envelopes me, peaked with the pump of my muscles. I am who I want to be. I am my best. My muscles reflect my hard-earned pride. I am not concerned whether anyone else sees my body, engorged and glowing. I am whole again.

Lend your opinion on the subject of protein and muscle building over on our DISCUSSION BOARDS!

Question: Are there any studies that you know of that "prove" protein is indeed the dietary ingredient used primarily for muscle building? I have read articles where dieticians argue that the emphasis on protein in the body building industry is only a theory.

Answer: There are dozens of published studies on protein needs and protein metabolism in bodybuilders and other hard training athletes. The leading researcher in the field is Dr. Peter Lemon.

First of all, we know from nitrogen balance studies that protein foods are indeed the raw building material for muscle tissue and other body proteins. 60-70% of the body's protein is found in muscle tissue. In order for muscle growth to occur, you must consume more protein than you utilize. All macronutrients (protein, carbohydrates and fats) contain carbon, hydrogen and oxygen, but only protein contains nitrogen. Because muscle tissue contains most of the body's protein and protein contains nitrogen, we can study protein usage in the body by measuring the amount of nitrogen consumed versus the amount excreted (in feces, urine and sweat). If the intake of nitrogen is greater than the amount excreted, then we know that protein is being retained and new muscle is synthesized. If you excrete more nitrogen than you consume, you are in negative nitrogen balance, indicating that protein is being broken down and muscle is being lost.

Thanks to the work of Dr. Lemon and others, we now know that the RDA for protein is not adequate to maintain positive nitrogen balance in hard-training individuals and that the bodybuilders have been right all along.

The RDA's are the official government guidelines set by the national research council. Currently the RDA for protein is based on bodyweight and is set at .8 grams per kilogram of bodyweight (that's .36 grams per lb. of bodyweight). For a 172 lb. man that equates to a paltry 62 grams per day. it is important to note that the RDA's were developed for the "average" sedentary person to avoid deficiency, not for athletes in hard training to gain muscle and strength. In fact, the RDA handbook even says, "no added allowance is made for stresses encountered in daily living which can give rise to increases in urinary nitrogen output."

The current research has now proven that exercise increases protein needs. In 1986 in the journal "Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise" (19:5, S179-S190,) Dr. Lemon says, "Several types of evidence indicate that exercise causes substantial changes in protein metabolism. In fact, recent data suggests that the protein recommended dietary allowance may actually be 100% higher for individuals who exercise on a regular basis. Optimal intakes, although unknown, may be even higher, especially for individuals attempting to increase muscle mass and strength." Dr. Lemon's most recent research (Nutrition Reviews, 54:S169-175,1996), indicates that strength athletes need up to 1.8g of protein per kg. of bodyweight to maintain positive nitrogen balance. That's .8 grams per lb. of bodyweight or 140 grams a day for someone who weighs 172 lbs. This is very close to the long-held belief of bodybuilders that 1 gram per pound of bodyweight is optimal.

Some studies have shown that even higher protein intakes may be necessary in hard training strength athletes. In one study of Polish weighlifters (Nutr Metabolism 12:259-274), 5 of 10 athletes were still in negative nitrogen balance even while consuming 250% of the RDA. Although there is not enough evidence to confirm that protein intakes higher than 1.8 g/kg will increase nitrogen retention and muscle growth, there are two scenarios where it makes sense that increasing protein beyond these levels will be beneficial. The first is when weight gain is desired. To gain weight protein should be increased to allow for the caloric surplus that is necessary to add lean bodyweight. Adding more carbohydrates and fats would skew the macronutrient ratios and possibly lead to increased fat storage. The second time when more protein may be justified is when low carb dieting is being employed. In this case, protein and to some extent, fats, are increased to offset the drop in carbohydrates so that the caloric deficit does not become too large, which could result in loss of lean body mass.

So much research has been done on protein and athletes that it amazes me that so many conservative registered dieticians and medical professionals still cling to the outdated notion that the recommended daily allowance (RDA) for protein is sufficient for muscle growth. It is no longer just a theory that protein intakes higher than the RDA build muscle, it is now a scientific fact.

If you want to delve deeper into the subject, I'd suggest you head to the library and look up these studies:

1) Lemon, Peter, "Protein and Exercise: update", Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, Vol 19, No. 5, Pgs S179 - S190, 1987

2) Lemon, Peter, "Is increased dietary protein necessary or beneficial for individuals with a physically active lifestyle?" Nutrition reviews, Vol 54: pgs. S 169-175, 1996

3) Lemon, Peter, "Do athletes need more dietary protein and amino acids?" International Journal of Sports Nutrition, S 39-61, 1995

4) Lemon, Peter, "Effects of exercise on protein and Amino Acid Metabolism." Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, Vol.13,pgs.141-149, 1981

5) Tarnopolsky, M, Evaluation of protein requirements for trained strength athletes." Journal of Applied Physiology, VOl 73, No 5, pgs 1986-1995, 1993

6) Tarnopolsky, M., Dietary protein requirements for bodybuilders vs sedentary controls (abstract), Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 18:564, 1986

7) Wagenmakers, AJM. "Muscle amino acid metabolism at rest and during exercise: role inhuman physiology and metabolism." Exercise and Sports Science reviews, Vol.26, pgs. 287-314, 1998

Flexing, posing, fantasy. Running time 3:11

Access to Full Video Now 100% FREE!!!

After reading this article, let us know what you think! Share your opinions about steroids, natural bodybuilding or any other topic that is on your mind! Join our message boards HERE!

Why I chose NOT to take steroids or performance enhancing drugs and why you should stay natural too.

By Tom Venuto, lifetime natural bodybuilder

Many people choose not to take drugs for fear of health consequences. Although this may be a legitimate concern depending on the degree and duration of drug use, this is not the reason I chose to stay natural. In fact, I believe that the dangers of steroids and other performance enhancing drugs are probably exaggerated greatly and sensationalized by the media. In my opinion, scare tactics like, "You're going to get a brain tumor and liver cancer" aren't really accurate or effective. If this were an effective approach, then drug use wouldn't be so widespread today.

It's not a matter of morals, ethics or cheating either. How does one define "moral behavior?" I believe the only definition of moral behavior that most people will agree on is that "moral" means you never do anything to hurt another human being or infringe on their right to do what they want with their lives. As long as you're not hurting or infringing on others, then who's to judge what's right or wrong? Few people would disagree that it shows questionable morals and a lack of character to take drugs, lie about it and compete in a drug tested competition, but as long as everyone is on a level playing field, then morality is probably not a valid argument.

My prime motivation for staying natural is not a matter of right or wrong, healthy or unhealthy. My motivation is different: What I want is the joy and fulfillment that only comes from becoming the best I can be without using any artificial assistance. I want to fully express the possibilities of the human body, mind and spirit. I want to actualize my full potential. If I take drugs, then I won't really know what my true potential is; I'll never know whether it's the drugs or me.

The real joy in athletics or bodybuilding is not in having a beautiful body or a 1st place award; the joy is in earning it. The joy is in working hard and seeing the type of person you become in pursuit of your goals. The joy is in watching yourself become a real winner and a true champion - on the inside. Earning it makes you into a better human being. You develop character, integrity, persistence, determination and a strong work ethic - all positive qualities that transfer to other areas of your life. There's no true and lasting joy or fulfillment in results that are artificially produced. Using drugs is like going to the store and buying the trophy. There's no joy in that - you didn't earn that!

Suppose you took a "magic pill" and developed an incredible body in a very short period of time. Do you really think you're going to feel happy, proud and fulfilled? Do you think your self-esteem is going to increase? I don't think so. I think that despite the way you'd look on the outside, and despite some fleeting and superficial satisfaction, deep on the inside you'd feel that your "victory" was hollow. In the long run, I think your self-esteem would go down! Especially when your illusory gains quickly vanish as soon as your crutch is removed.

If you're using drugs and winning competitions, no matter how good you think it feels, I guarantee you're not feeling the same thing I'm feeling. I cannot even put into words the feelings of exhilaration and pride and joy that come from achieving a goal on the merits of your own hard work and belief in yourself. And this feeling is going to last me a lifetime. I did it. I created it. I earned it. On my own.

I don't believe in drugs. I believe in myself.

I also believe in a power greater than myself. And the reason I believe in myself is because I believe that this great power is not separate from me but is inside of me. Although most people are asleep to their potential and don't realize it, everyone has inner power that is spiritual in nature. By looking inside and tapping into it, every one of us can achieve more than we ever dreamed possible. Discovering and using your inner power is more important than any diet, training routine, supplement or steroid drug ever conceived by man. I believe that looking for anything outside of yourself does not make you stronger - it only makes you weaker. Real strength does not come out of a bottle or a needle. Real strength comes from within.

The mind is powerful. I believe that too many people set mental limits on what's possible naturally and that's the very reason they fail to get very far without some kind of enhancement. If you look at a drug free bodybuilder with a great physique and you say, "There's no way that guy is natural," you're setting limitations on your own growth. Your subconscious mind will take that accusation literally and prevent you from ever reaching that level of development naturally.

I am not anti-steroid. I would prefer to call myself pro-natural. I don't think being anti-anything is a good position to take. There's a big difference between being pro-natural and being anti-steroid. Motivational author Dr. Wayne Dyer once wrote, "Everything you are against weakens you. Everything you are for empowers you." During the Vietnam war, a group of protesters asked mother Teresa if she would join them in their march against the war and she replied "No, I won't march against the war with you, but if you have a march for peace, I'll be there." Natural athletes and bodybuilders need a change of attitude. Trying to fight a war against drugs is a losing battle and a waste of valuable time and energy. Instead we must focus on promoting the positive aspects of staying natural, as they far outweigh anything positive that might come from using drugs.

I'm not trying to wage a war on drugs or push anyone into doing anything or not doing anything. There are certain things in life that people must discover for themselves. Unfortunately many people discover life's lessons the hard way. One of my mentors taught me that a person's life can serve as either a warning or an example. My hope is to serve as a positive example. I would like to help people open their minds, raise their standards and expand their beliefs of what's possible. I'd like to help others realize that there are more rewards in being natural than in being artificial.

Although I've been referring primarily to steroids, the very same reasoning applies to any drug or artificial aid whatsoever, be it for weight loss, cosmetic improvement or performance enhancement. If you build your body or win a competition with artificial aids, you're a phony. And you'll never enjoy all the incredible rewards that come from being a real champion.

THE NATURAL WAY IS THE ONLY TRUE PATH TO SUCCESS, PRIDE, JOY, HAPPINESS, LONG TERM FULFILLMENT AND SELF-ESTEEM!

Lori interrupts Gabrielle Nicander's beauty sleep to make a provacative short film of her getting dressed.
Flexing, posing, fantasy. Running time 3:26

Access to Full Video Now 100% FREE!!!

Click image for gallery

It's vintage! It's muscle! It's bikini! What could be better? ;-)

Click image for gallery

After reading this article, lend us your opinion on our message boards!

1. To avoid injury, you should always do a light warm-up set of 15 reps before each exercise.

2. Dropset- When you exchange a heavy weight for a lighter one in the middle of a set in order to gain more reps this is called a 'dropset'. Dropsets are optional and are to be done as the last set of each exercise.

3. Smith machine- Many of these exercises; such as flat bench presses, the incline bench press, shoulder presses, squats and lunges can be done on what is known as the Smith machine for variation.

4. Supersets- When you train two muscle groups together, one after the other such as biceps-triceps, chest-back, quads-hamstrings, calves-tibia.

5. Reps- When you start each exercise your reps (repetitions) should be high. By your third or fourth set, as you increase the weight you should drop the number of repetitions.

Heavy Days:Once a week, pick a certain body part or muscle group and go to the maximum with a power move to work that specific muscle group. For example: when training legs, max out on squats. For chest, max out on bench press and so on. By doing this, your body will be taxed to the extent that it will not recuperate before your next workout. This will help you to develop your strength and gain an accurate perception of your progress.

Stretching: Muscle, tendon, ligament and joints are naturally flexible, but this means that they can also stiffen and limit your range of movement. However, they can also stretch, giving you a wider range of movement as well the ability to contract additional muscle fiber. Stretching before you workout actually allows you to workout harder. By stretching the body parts you are going to workout, your body will adjust to the heavy resistance of the weight, thus making it possible to workout longer and without fear of suffering damage to stiff muscles.

Breathing: It is very important that you do not hold your breath while working out. If you hold your breath, you can most definitely injure yourself along with depleting your strength. Breathe out with effort while you are exerting yourself. For example: When doing squats, take in a breath as you stand with the weight on your shoulders and squat. Then expel the breath as you push yourself back up.

After reading this article, be sure to discuss it in our forums! Access them HERE

From SteroidLaw.com
By Rick Collins, J.D.

Read the papers and you’d think that there’s a massive army of juiced-up prepubescent girls terrorizing the playgrounds of America. We can credit Associated Press (AP) reporter Linda A. Johnson for breaking the frightening news with an April article entitled, “More Girls Try Taking Steroids to Tone Up.” In it, she proclaimed that “[a]n alarming number of American girls, some as young as 9, are using bodybuilding steroids – not necessarily to get an edge on the playing field, but to get the toned, sculpted look of models and movie stars.” Two days later, AP sports columnist Tim Dahlberg more tersely suggested that “9-year-old girls are taking steroids just to look good.”

The Baltimore Sun then ran a piece by Milton Kent declaring that “up to 7 percent of middle school girls, age 9 to 14” have tried or are using anabolic steroids. More journalists jumped on the “nine-year-old girls” story as sensationalistic shorthand for the dangers of steroid abuse. Politicians started using the image in their anti-steroid pandering to the voters back home. Even ubiquitous Canadian lawyer Dick Pound, ever eager to convince American tax payers to commit more money to his World Anti-Doping Agency, used it in a speech.

But is it true? Is there really statistical support for the horrifying proposition that somewhere in a school cafeteria there’s a jacked-up nine-year-old washing down handfuls of steroid tablets with sips from her juice box? Most reporters, unfortunately, have been suspiciously vague in their references to “studies” on the subject. One reporter attributed the story to anonymous Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS) questionnaires used by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). It’s true that a recent one supposedly showed that a whopping 7.3% of girls had used steroids. But it’s also true that the questionnaires have serious methodological flaws that account for the glaring discrepancy between these results and the results of better designed studies that show 1% or less. A high number of “false positive” responses are likely from students who may confuse anabolic steroids with steroid-based cortisone creams, birth control pills, formerly legal adrenal steroids like “andro,” or performance-enhancing dietary supplements like creatine, amino acids or whey protein. And here’s the kicker: the YRBSS surveys aren’t given to middle-school kids! Only high school students are administered these surveys.

So, what stats exist for middle-schoolers? According to sources at the CDC, a very small number of states and cities conduct a Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) at the middle-school level. The one question about steroid use on these surveys is even more vague than the national survey question, and some localities have chosen to omit the question altogether. If the question is posed, the middle-school survey simply asks, “Have you ever used steroids?” and the student merely circles “Yes” or “No.” False positives are highly probable because the term “steroid” is not defined and words like “anabolic” and “illegal” are omitted. Even so, state-specific surveys don’t suggest a significant number of middle-school girls taking steroids. For example, the 2003 Maine YRBS reported that the “current level of steroid use represents a statistically significant decrease in steroid use since 1997.”

How about national survey data for middle-schoolers? Although still subject to potential false positive responses, the University of Michigan’s annual Monitoring the Future study isn’t as ambiguous as the YRBS because it gives a brief explanation of what’s meant by the term “steroid.” Not surprisingly, the 2004 study finds much lower rates of usage: only 1.9% of all 8th graders, male and female, admitted ever using steroids. While any adolescent steroid abuse is obviously a problem, does the study support claims of a burgeoning epidemic? Not at all – in fact, the rate is exactly the same as it was back in 1991. Further, only 1% of the 8th grade girls admitted steroid use in the past year. “I would certainly not say that there is an epidemic of use among females,” stated Dr. Lloyd Johnston, the study’s head researcher. “The story was hyped in an AP story earlier this year, and it just keeps playing on.”

Even Dr. Harrison Pope, the Harvard psychiatrist and steroid researcher largely responsible for the public perception of a “’roid rage” epidemic, has flat out stated that “steroid use by girls is extremely rare. There have been some large, anonymous studies [in which] there were surprisingly high figures [for girls]. You have to allow that many of the responses may be false positives. A girl may say, ‘Oh, the dermatologist gave me steroids to treat poison ivy’ where she is confusing corticosteroids with anabolic steroids, which are two entirely different substances.” In his most recent appearance before Congress, he debunked the idea that girls are injecting liquid steroids or downing oral tablets like candy corn, stating that “even the 1% rate is still probably a substantial overestimate” and that a 0.2% rate is the most reliable estimate. “I would strongly question the assertion that there is currently a widespread public health problem of anabolic steroid use by teenage girls or young women in the United States.”

If the experts on steroids aren’t buying the story, maybe the experts on kids might. I asked the social worker at a New York middle school – a professional who works closely with “at risk” children and is privy to their darkest secrets – for a reliable opinion on the validity of the story. She shared the confidential results from a recent district-wide survey that showed that the percentages of 8th and 10th grade girls who’d ever tried steroids were less than 1 percent. Her view: the story was a joke.

So, have our middle-school daughters ditched Coach bags and bejeweled cell phones for Deca and D-bol? Are our little fourth graders forking over their milk money to brace-faced little dealers after chorus class? The truth is alarming indeed, but not because there’s an epidemic of bearded, balding, acne-scarred tweens tearing up the local Limited Too. There isn’t, and we should all have known that. What’s scary is how easily lazy reporters and self-serving opportunists can foment a wave of national hysteria in the absence of facts, evidence and common sense.

Click image for gallery

Be sure to discuss this post on our message board! Go check it out HERE.

A woman’s pelvis consists of four bones (paired innominate bones, coccyx, and the sacrum) held together by ligaments. The size and shape of these bones have a tremendous impact on how a woman looks physically. The pelvic shape is classified by the "Caldwell-Moloy" (4) system.

There are four "pure" pelvic shapes in this system--android (A), gynecoid (B), anthropoid (C), and platypelloid (D) shaped pelvis. The pelvis of any person may have some features of the opposite sex. A and C are most common in males, B and A in white females, B and C in black females, while D is uncommon in both sexes (3).

The android pelvis (sometimes called a "true male pelvis") is found in about 20% of American women. Women who happen to have such a pelvis tend to have "flat rear ends." Many of the “waif women” prominently seen in the industry modeling have this type of pelvis. Women with this shape of pelvis have virtually no real difficulty in achieving a flat stomach because their pelvises are similar to the average man.

The gynecoid pelvis (sometimes called a "true female pelvis") is found in about 50% of the women in America. It is the "classic" form that we associate with women and has an anteroposterior diameter just slightly less than the transverse diameter. Lucy Lawless of Xena, Warrior Princess fame has a classic gynecoid pelvis. Women like this tend to be shapely and curvy and are able to have a flat stomach without really dropping body fat levels low enough to cause some female problems (i.e., irregular periods, fertility problems, and hormonal balance disruption).

The anthropoid pelvis is very long and almost "ovoid" in shape. It is more common in nonwhite females (it makes up about 25% of pelvic type in white women and close to 50% in nonwhite women). Women who have such a pelvis shape tend to have "larger rear ends" and may carry a lot of adipose tissue/weight in the buttocks as well as in the abdomen. These women can have a flat stomach with some real effort (they may have to drop body fat levels down a bit lower than women with the other two aforementioned pelvis types, but it's possible.

The platypelloid pelvis is very short(almost like a "flattened gynecoid shape"). Only about 5% of women have a true and pure pelvis of this type. Women having a platypelloid pelvis tend to carry a lot of weight in the lower abdomen. It's very difficult for these women to have really flat abdomens without getting body fat levels down into the single digits.

What does all this have to do with having a pouch? Since many women are a mixture of pelvic types regardless of what they do they are still going to end up with a little pouch in their abdomen region

Another important factor in developing award-winning abs is to carefully monitor your caloric intake. In order to bring out the ab muscles, plan on losing 1-2 pounds per week. Between 6-8 weeks from now you should have an awesome set of abs on display.

Never forget your abs!” says IFBB Fitness Pro and 1998 NPC Team Universe (Fitness) runner-up, Amy Yanagisawa. “They are your body's center of power and provide core strength.

Strong abs aid balance, help prevent lower back injuries and promote good posture. Consistent abdominal workouts (10-15 min, 4-5x per week) performed correctly are not just for physical well-being, but for aesthetics too. Another important tip is to be sure to keep track of your ab exercises in your workout journal so you know which exercises work best for you and produce the best results!”

There are dozens of ab exercises to help you maintain good posture, alleviate lower back pain, and improve your athletic performance. This article has provided you with the tools to develop an intelligent, varied routine that meets your specific training needs and goals. Finally, there is no magic formula that will make your abs appear. Nothing replaces the time and consistent effort you put into your quest for phenomenal abdominals!

References:

1. www.testosterone.net, Oct 30, '98, No. 25

2. www.acefitness.com, American Council on Exercise (ACE), Study Reveals Best and Worst Abdominal Exercises, May 14, 2001

3. www.kumc.edu, Sexual Differences in the Pelvis (pg 337)

4.Old Dominion University School of Nursing, Anatomy & Physiology http://web.odu.edu/webroot/orgs/hs/nurs/nursing.nsf/pages/664anatphys_sp00

Rob Wilkins is a Technical Sergeant in the US Air Force stationed at The Pentagon, Washington, D.C. Wilkins is also a Special Assistant to the International Federation of Bodybuilders (IFBB) and a recipient of the IFBB Gold Medal. To contact Wilkins e-mail him at waaszup@yahoo.com

After reading this entry, why not discuss it on our message board? Go check it out HERE.

Question: Is there a difference between "percentage of body fat" and "body mass index", and if so, what is it? How do the two correlate?

Answer: Yes, there is a huge difference between body fat and body mass index (BMI). Body fat is a much better indicator of your health, fitness level, disease risk and ideal body weight than BMI. In fact, Shape up America, the anti obesity campaign started by Dr. C. Everett Koop, recently published a press release pointing out the shortcomings of BMI. According to the Shape up America website, BMI missclassifies one out of four people and should not be used by athletes.

To understand why BMI is not a good indicator of your health and fitness, you first need to understand what the BMI is. I pulled out my handy textbook, "Physiology of Sport and Exercise" By Wilmore and Costill to get the official definition. BMI was described in the glossary follows:

"BMI is a measurement of body overweight or obesity determined by dividing weight (in kilograms) by height (in meters) squared."

The text went on to say that you're considered overweight if you're female and your BMI is 27.3 or greater or if you're male and you're BMI is 27.8 or higher. It also said that BMI correlates highly with body composition and is a better indicator of fitness than your weight alone.

If you're sedentary, then I'll buy the part about BMI being better than going just by your body weight alone, but the part about BMI correlating well to body composition is complete hogwash!

Let me show you an example of how BMI falls short as a measure of body composition.

This morning I weighed in at 201 lbs. and I am 5' 8 inches tall. Converted to metrics, 201 lbs. is 91.36 kilograms and 5' 8" is 172 cm or 1.72 meters. So now let's plug my stats into the BMI formula and see what we come up with...

201 lbs. = 91.36 kilos.
1.72 meters squared = 2.96
91.36 kilos / 2.96 = 30.86

If you don't have a calculator handy or you don't feel like doing the math, just click here for a handy body mass index calculator http://www.caloriecontrol.org/bmi.html .

So, if we judge my physical condition according to my BMI of 30.86, then I'm "obese" and I need to lose some weight. As you can tell from my photos, that's not the case. Even though I'm currently not in a pre-competition mode, my body fat is still in the single digits (9.3% last time I had it measured), which is considered very lean for men my age.

Why is BMI a poor measure of health and fitness? It's simply because BMI does NOT take into account body fat vs. lean tissue. Body builders and other athletes carry more lean body mass than the average person and will therefore be classified as overweight if BMI is used as the criteria for measurement. Conversely, someone could have a "healthy" BMI of 19 to 22 and yet have a dangerously high level of body fat (a "skinny fat person").

The solution of course, is to differentiate between your lean body weight and your fat weight. This can be done with body composition testing. There are many ways to test body fat, but the method I recommend is skinfold testing (the "pinch" test). You'll get the most accurate reading if you have an experienced tester measure you at three or four skinfold sites, but if you don't have access to an experienced professional, you can test your own body fat with a home testing kit called the Accu-Measure. The Accu measure tests total body fat with a single skinfold pinch on your iliac crest (hip bone). I bought a set for myself (very inexpensive) and I found that the measurements were fairly close to the measurements I got from the $450.00 computerized "Skyndex" calipers we use at our health clubs. You can order the Accu Measure caliper at: http://www.bodytrends.com/acm.htm

In conclusion, body fat percentage is the only way to go. BMI is a poor indicator of your health, fitness or ideal weight. Forget about BMI - and while you're at it, forget about those Metropolitan height and weight tables too. According to the ideal weight tables, a man 5' 8" tall with a medium frame should have an ideal weight of 138 - 152. That means I need to lose at least 49 pounds!

Click image for gallery

Get FREE Preview HERE
Get Access to Full Video HERE

I think these are the two hottest figure girls around. Tight bodies, playfull attitudes - they really have it all! If you want to discuss Jennifer or Meliisa (or the two of them together!) check out THE FORUM!

Click image for gallery

Click image for gallery

Click image for gallery

Vintage Kirstin Robinson

A Lori Braun Retro PhotoBlog on KirstinCLICK HERE