You guys ARE stronger than this vegan soyboy, right?

are you retarded?
he said years of lifting + juice + meat and not roids alone

>>roids alone make you big
Yes.

men who took Testosterone and DID NOT exercise gained MORE MUSCLE MASS than those who exercised naturally

The Effects of Supraphysiologic Doses of Testosterone on Muscle Size and Strength in Normal Men

nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199607043350101

What this means is if someone were to take Testosterone and sit on his ass watching TV all day, he would still gain MORE muscle mass than someone who works out regularly but is natural.

---

Here is another study done on 18-35 year old males:
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11701431

Up to 600mg of Testosterone were given for 20 weeks (5 months).
The men were NOT on any exercise programs.

The lean mass gained was 7.9kg (17 lbs).

>17lb muscle added on a twig is big

> P= 0.0001

is Clarence into bodybuilding now or some shit?

There's no way he can make it to Olympic weight classes like that.. I mean at least not the medals

I'm pretty sure he's almost broken world records

>GUYS YOU CAN GAIN MASS WITHOUT EATING PROTEIN AND PROPER NUTRITION

>I just have to take roids and I too will become big

>I'm pretty sure he's almost broken world records
lolwat... you realize records are by bodyweight classes right? and he's not olympic level

>twigs
185lbs @ 6'0 isn't a twig. All men had a bmi between 21-26.
Stay mad and wrong.
>p = 0.000001
no, read the studies. p values were statistically significant.
>steroids alone won't give you muscles!
>oh wait I'm wrong, I'll just equivocate and anger post cartoon images
K

>but the subjects must be skeletons...ya that's the ticket.
>ok maybe the studies are wrong!??
>oh god its true
the stages of Coping.

>read the studies
>p=.000001 is significant gays

>still mad
>still lying

>he still thinks you can gain past DYEL or amerifat with only steroids
Imagine being "P = >.000001" retarded

>statistically significant
>The changes in fat-free mass were highly dependent on testosterone dose (P = 0.0001) and correlated with log testosterone concentrations (r = 0.73, P = 0.0001

lmgtfy.com/?q=p value for retards

>heh, sure you can put on more lean muscle mass, but will it be pretty?

>> P= 0.0001
...which means that there was a 0.0001% chance of a false positive

hence its statistically significant you dumb niggers
0.0001 is far lower than 0.05, which is the common default alpha setting.

Have you ever done research user? The equation is flawed 100% of the time you have a pvalue higher than .001. I don't care to look up the method.

I assume it's pick a bunch of meat-slurping, average, meatcuck americans- have them pin, and then let them go about their daily lives for three months, take results- post high p-value, list as significant.

Not the samefag, but it seems you don't understand the simple argument at hand here.

Steroids alone do not increase muscle mass, because unless your body has protein stores and large amounts of calories it can pull from to create lean mass, you won't gain muscle. You need proper nutrition. The original argument was "it's steroids, not proper nutrition, etc". No. That's brainlet territory.

You're not gonna make it in school or in gains brah.

>p value is very small, indicating that the results are highly unlikely to have occurred randomly
>b-but the equation is wrong guys also americucks an shiet
is this the power of cognitive dissonance?

no

I could prove that my dick fits gently in your ass with a high p-value. That doesn't make something scientifically significant. Because some fatfucks gained muscle on their regular diets from test means absolutely nothing scientifically.

>Steroids alone do not increase muscle mass, because unless your body has protein stores and large amounts of calories it can pull from to create lean mass, you won't gain muscle. You need proper nutrition. The original argument was "it's steroids, not proper nutrition, etc".

so you went from "but the men are twigs" to "the study is wrong" to "it doesn't matter because they won't look aesthetic enough" to "well statistical equations are fundmentally flawed"

>not samefag
lol

>you need proper nutrition
roids will compensate even if your nutrition is poor. obviously you need "nutrition" of some sort, it doesn't have to be great or even healthy

>Because some fatfucks gained muscle on their regular diets from test means absolutely nothing scientifically.
What did he mean by this?

Cognitive dissonance is a feeling brainlet. Not continued opposition.

i work in research

if your level of significance is set to 0.05 then a result below that will mean your result is most likely not due to random chance and sampling error.

i didn't look at the study only read your comment

ITT meatcucks think you can't gain muscle on a vegan diet

'lean body mass' is anything that isn't fat, not necessarily muscle
and before some brainlet says BUT THEY GOT STRONGER, that could be one of a number of factors such as muscles retaining increased glycogen and water giving more potential for elastic rebounding or steroids interacting with adrenal glands

the evidence is simply not there to support the nattycuck cope argument that YOU CAN JUST TAKE ROIDS AND NOT LIFT

>t. Middle school science fair attendee
If you have a perfect value, you're not proving anything significant. I could fart and prove my p value of having farted at that time as a perfect value. If I use that study as evidence of me farting, does that btfo everyone who didn't fart at that time?
>having to speak in low English

...They're bench press went from 20lb to 40lb
>they're not twigs
>roids will compensate
>you can build muscle on 5g protein/day and 250 calories
You make arguing easy user. Also not samefag.

i have no clue what you're on about dude

you do understand how statistical tests work right? t-tests, ANOVA, bonferroni's multiple comparison analysis... Tukeys.

read about p values here

onlinecourses.science.psu.edu/statprogram/node/138

onlinecourses.science.psu.edu/statprogram/node/138
Here's your link in case you've forgot about it already. Read up. Having a perfect p-value means you're not proving anything new.
>test increases strength
Yeah.
>not having proper building blocks to create muscle mass while having superman levels of test allows you to create muscle
No.
Are you blind?

When you take steroids, you can eat twinkies beef jerkey and fist fulls of sugar and put on muscle mass.

You're right.
But someone who's taking steroids and drops a ton of water and glycogen will be demonstrably and observably larger then a natural who does the same thing.

One look at any "natural" bodybuilding contest will show you that.

I think this retard think's he's arguing with one person with multiple arguments.

a p value lower than your established level of significant means you're failing to reject the alternative hypothesis based on the observations you have made. i know exactly what im talking about maybe you should go back to school

what the everliving fuck are those calves

when did filthyfrank get so ripped

Literally one of the first things you'll be taught in highschool science class, if you study this type of thing, is perfect p-values and scientific cause.

I doubt you've passed highschool.

this is literally the opposite of how p value works

there's literally nobody on here stronger than him in the c&j/snatch for his bodyweight class

well yes, temporarily
but unless they blast and 'cruise' at supernatural levels year round its going to be very temporary

I cruise on 200mg test d a week and anything I visibly 'gain' from increased retention disappears
its quite heartbreaking to see

You must have some mighty test cruising at only 200mg. I know a dude who used to look like Betty White until he pinned 900mg.

Veeky Forums is so fucking tragically pathetic sometimes. the evidence is right in front of your fucking eyes. sorry roidfags, your skilled eating and "hard work" might help you with gains, but if you stopped lifting and continued roids, you'd still see better gains than me no matter what. read it and weep, fucking faggots.

>you can eat nothing and gain with roids

>cant fraud
I remember when I was a natty scrub

You actually believe 0,5% of Veeky Forums can deadlift 340kg, not to mention his olympic lifts, I bet 95% of Veeky Forums don't even do olympic lifts

you are a retard. by rejecting the null hypothesis you fail to reject the alt. hypothesis. your p value is the probability is more contradictory to the null hypothesis giving you more credence to reject the null hypothesis.

there's no such thing as "perfect p-values", you are a literal teeth gap breather, in the aforementioned study there is obvious sampling distribution. causality has nothing to do with statistical significance you stupid fuck.

>coping with my small mind

He would
Be worthless without roids

Kek this is a copy of my bait thread from a couple weeks ago +1 for you sir

>RETARD ALERT
They didn't take into account if the participants did any other physical activities like riding a bike or doing other shit
It's hard to sit still when you are on test I guarantee you that they did more than "sitting on their ass and watching TV"

Christ, Veeky Forums. How many times a day do autistic people post about the soyboy meme thinking it is all about consumption of soy?

No, but I'm happy whenever someone makes it vegan or not.

absolute legend