The 4 Hour Body - The Results

[Hannibal]

There aren't any "scientific studies" that prove how gravity works so I guess you better chain yourself to the floor in your basement just in case.

We don't have to prove how it works or why it works, only that it works.

If you eat more food, you will gain weight.

If you lift weights while eating more food, you will build muscle. How much muscle absolutely depends on your genetics, sure, but you can't tell me that this guy trained with any real intensity or ate all that much and then go on to say that it was only his genetics holding him back.

He didn't train with anything heavier than 50 lbs.

He didn't eat more than 2300 calories a day.

He's 37 years old.

He didn't do more than one set of any kind of real exercise, no more than two real exercises per workout and he did not more than 10 reps.

Yeah, I can do one set of seven pushups twice a week, but I won't look any different in two years. If I cycled weight and went up three pounds a workout and then dropped intensity when it got too heavy, then I would be getting somewhere, albeit slowly.

I skimmed through his blog. I did not see any kind of workout tracking, no form of progressive overload, nothing. He listed his equipment (a weight bench, a 50lb dumbbell, a 100 lb weight vest that he didn't use).

 

[Albatross]

The defence mechanisms are strong!

He did gain weight - a full 20 lbs at one point.

He did progress - he went from rowing the empty bar to 165 lbs for reps.

He even did make a full 10 lb recomp.

But none of it mattered because his he did it to a frame that is more gracile than that of a post menopausal female who can't even pick up a dumbbell.

 

[RexImperator]

He did more or less everything right - counted macros, ate clean, regimented program, enough sleep, blood work, 20 lb bulk, slow careful cut - and came out looking like absolute unchanged shit.

Not true - he did a terrible program and didn't eat enough. "Cutting" at circa 150lbs. bodyweight? Absurd.

 

[Hannibal]

The defence mechanisms are strong!

He did gain weight - a full 20 lbs at one point.

He did progress - he went from rowing the empty bar to 165 lbs for reps.

He even did make a full 10 lb recomp.

But none of it mattered because his he did it to a frame that is more gracile than that of a post menopausal female who can't even pick up a dumbbell.

How does that not prove that, even though he doesn't have "monster genetics" or even a standard program that he did not progress?

He put in the bare minimum lifting wise and burned fat and gained muscle and got stronger.

That he had any results at all is a testament to how effective it is for men to lift weights. This case proves my point more than it proves yours.

I've read the studies concerning how many sets vs reps vs frequency. Fact is, one set to failure is the bare minimum.

If you get 60% of the results with one set to failure, you get 80% of the results with two sets to failure, 90% with three sets, you get the idea.

None of that shit matters if you don't eat enough.

The program is dumb, but it's not what really limited him.

 

[Lechon]

Like I said at the bottom of the last page, your gain of 3KG in 5 months (7.2KG on a yearly basis) is actually a quite solid muscle gain rate. If you'd stuck with your program and diet for say, a period of 2 or 3 years, you would have ended up 14-20KG heavier. That would have made a huge difference to your life. Unfortunately 5 months is not a "sustained and honest crack at gaining weight", the process is much longer and slower for those of us who aren't genetically gifted (or on steroids).

Totally agree here. If you've gained 3 kilos of skeletal muscle in 5 months, that's great. 3 kilos of real muscle is a major difference in an average guy's physique. The only way you change from skinny to big in 2-3 years is steroids, and lots of them, and/or freak genetics.

The media and fitness industry just keeps on pumping out photoshopped pictures of genetically gifted bodybuilders on extreme steroids like trenbolone in addition to the bread and butter steroids like test and deca, and are using insulin and growth hormones to max out the gains even more, and some also do synthol to get even bigger. Some do it with no skill so it's obvious, others do it with more skill so it's not that easy to see (Rich Piana), and others do it so well it can't be detected even by their friends.

Adding 20 kilos of lean mass to your frame would completely change your body type. Doing it in just a few years would be a great achivement. Adding another 10-20 kilos would really push to boundaries of natural muscle development in reasonably gifted individuals and require top quality training. The only reason why it doesn't appear so is the people you see in the media are using steroids, and so are most of the guys who get great gains in gyms.

Lifting to failure won't mean much if it's the same weight every time.

If you're lifting the same weights every time, you're not lifting to failure, unless you're increasing the reps or overtrained/sick. If you're increasing the reps, fine, then you're exposing your muscle to progressive overload. Standard resistance training says it's usually preferable to keep the number of reps low, but even sets with up to 30-40 reps have been documented to give great gains in hypertrophy and strength. If you're meeting the wall at the same place every workout because you're overtrained/sick, it's a problem you need to solve.

 

[Phoenix]

If you've gained 3 kilos of skeletal muscle in 5 months, that's great.

Not really. There is an opportunity cost in investing 50%+ of your surplus willpower and bodily stamina into an enterprise that is paying off at that kind of rate. But when you're at war with your own body every meal time and you leave the gym barely able to open the door after doing half the volume everyone else does, to go from "60% the size of a typical guy" to "65% the size of a typical guy", it's a forlorn exercise.

Foolish really, literally no chance in Australia you'd ever be considered "athletic" let alone "buff" against the typical guy, all you'd get is "hey man you're not quite as skinny as you used to be" from some friends. So why do it?

If it had only taken 25% surplus stamina, or the result had been going from 90% typical size to 101% typical size, that could be called be a reasonable course of action. Nothing special, but reasonable. Either a result that had a value greater than zero, or an effort that didn't materially dent your ability to pursue other enterprises.

To use an analogy: if you're a gifted musician, and 5'6", it is a stupid idea to train 8hrs everyday on a basketball court to go from a C- basket ball player to a C+. You'd focus on your music, because the world most rewards the outstanding, not the "not quite as bad as they used to be".

 

[Menace]

Phoenix you may have a medical condition. I'm ectomorphic and a hard gainer (which I think really means low-appetite person). I have absolutely changed how I look to the point you can definitely tell I lift weights when my shirt is off, however I am not big by any stretch of the imagination. It has taken 2 years to get to this point. However, I am on TRT and I do from time to time use SARMs, but most of the results have just come from consistent lifting weights (compound + some targeted). Nothing magical.

 

[zatara]

Not really. There is an opportunity cost in investing 50%+ of your surplus willpower and bodily stamina into an enterprise that is paying off at that kind of rate. But when you're at war with your own body every meal time and you leave the gym barely able to open the door after doing half the volume everyone else does, to go from "60% the size of a typical guy" to "65% the size of a typical guy", it's a forlorn exercise.

Foolish really, literally no chance in Australia you'd ever be considered "athletic" let alone "buff" against the typical guy, all you'd get is "hey man you're not quite as skinny as you used to be" from some friends. So why do it?

If it had only taken 25% surplus stamina, or the result had been going from 90% typical size to 101% typical size, that could be called be a reasonable course of action. Nothing special, but reasonable. Either a result that had a value greater than zero, or an effort that didn't materially dent your ability to pursue other enterprises.

To use an analogy: if you're a gifted musician, and 5'6", it is a stupid idea to train 8hrs everyday on a basketball court to go from a C- basket ball player to a C+. You'd focus on your music, because the world most rewards the outstanding, not the "not quite as bad as they used to be".

If 4 hours a week of training (a reasonable training regime) is "50%+ of your surplus willpower and bodily stamina " then you might have other biological problems. How many hours a week do you spend watching tv? How many hours on the internet? I've worked 65 hour weeks before and still fit-in gym time, because it really just doesn't need to be that time consuming.

The average standard is higher in Australia yes, but that just means you need to work harder if you want to stand-out. Or move to a different country. At the end of the day weightlifting isn't about comparing yourself to other men, though. The main, core benefit is in the hormonal changes and physical fitness it brings to yourself. Those are benefits for life.

(though I'll also never get tired of a woman's shocked/aroused gasp when they see you topless for the first time)

Its just a rather defeatist attitude to have worked out for 5 months, decided you'd "given it your all", and given up entirely on the idea of weightlifting.

Your musician/basketball analogy doesn't work because weightlifting is something anyone can be good at. And because it only takes up a tiny proportion of someone's life. Its approx 4 hours a week, not 8 hours a day. Your 5ft 6 tall musician should absolutely be playing 4 hours of basketball a week - it would keep him fit, healthy and provide a different hobby in addition to his music.

 

[Hannibal]

I don't understand your point. You're basically saying

"I busted my ass and tried really really hard for five months and I only have 7 pounds of muscle to show for it".

That's pretty good progress, to be honest.

You say to do something else to maximize another strength.

I can agree on this, but the fact is is that you weren't spending 8 hours a day lifting weights and you're not competing, you were spending a couple hours a week lifting weights.

If it takes too much out of you, go to the gym twice a week instead. During periods of high stress or shitty sleep, this is what I do.

You can still maximize another strength, you're only losing 2 hours a week tops.

I started my "lifting career" a skinny fat faggot at the age of 20. I weighed 145 lbs at six foot nothing. In all likelihood, I was weaker than the 37 year old guy in the OP. Now I'm at 200 lbs and I still have a ways to go.

There are diminishing returns with everything, but for the amount of time you spend versus what you get out of it, lifting weights is very hard to beat.

A few hours a week is nothing. Barring all that, just get on the juice.

 

[Phoenix]

you may have a medical condition.

Another way of saying "bad genes" though, and unfortunately medicine really isn't progressing particularly fast. Kids still get acne, men still go bald, the worst diseases are still treated with knives and poison. Where is the easy to take drug which stops fatties being hungry? Where is the easy to take drug that makes skinny guys ravenous and invigorates their weak digestive systems? I'm not even the worst, I know a guy who looks like a pencil -- there is zero chance he's ever not going to look skinny without drug assistance.

Basically the only available-by-prescription candidates are: megestrol acetate, which destroys your testosterone levels (gain fat but not muscle); cyproheptadine, which knocks you out stronger than any sleeping pill ever did; and THC, with its well-known side-effect of getting stoned, and internationally tends to be illegal and expensive.

That said there are a few things in the research stages, "ghrelin mimetics" etc, and many can now be obtained as "research chemicals" from "labs". So they might be worth a look, for feeding to rats only of course.

If 4 hours a week of training (a reasonable training regime) is "50%+ of your surplus willpower and bodily stamina " then you might have other biological problems. How many hours a week do you spend watching tv? How many hours on the internet? I've worked 65 hour weeks before and still fit-in gym time, because it really just doesn't need to be that time consuming.

The training was about 10pp, the other 40pp was force-feeding (which of course you have to ideally do 4+ times a day). Causes social issues when I can't eat with other people any more because it takes 30 minutes to get down a meal other guys finish in 10. Doing something mildly uncomfortable (actually I find it enjoyable) like gyming 4 times a week is in a different league to doing something quite unpleasant 4 times a day.

 

[Lechon]

If you've gained 3 kilos of skeletal muscle in 5 months, that's great.

Not really. There is an opportunity cost in investing 50%+ of your surplus willpower and bodily stamina into an enterprise that is paying off at that kind of rate. But when you're at war with your own body every meal time and you leave the gym barely able to open the door after doing half the volume everyone else does, to go from "60% the size of a typical guy" to "65% the size of a typical guy", it's a forlorn exercise.

My point here was you seemed to think 3 kilos of muscle in 5 months was little. Well, it's not. It's normal. And especially if you're only 60% of the size of a normal guy. That would suggest you have a small frame (lithe bones, small chest and general build), and increasing your muscle mass occurs in relation to your frame. So large frame, large gains, small frame small gains. And your frame, bone density and thickness will actually grow from resistance training, but that takes years, not 5 months.

Your problem seems to be the toll the exercise and eating takes on you. The normal reaction from resistance training is increased energy and well being from increased circulation, increased hormone levels etc. You seem to experience the opposite.

It's hard for me to pinpoint the exact cause, but maybe you need to start at a lower level of exertion. If you're having a hard time opening the door on your way out the gym, chances are you're working out too hard. But with time, your nervous system and body develops. Or it might just a system shock you'll overcome because you're small at the moment.

As for food, I eat a lot of calorie and protein rich food I really enjoy. In fact, eating a lot of food that tastes good is one of the reasons I like to train. I've been on an all steak dinner diet lately, the gains are great and it feels great too So did this premium ice cream. Fats add calories so you don't need to cram down (non-)food like shakes. Sauces contain fats, well marble beef contains fats, etc. Another bonus is, most calorie rich foods taste good naturally.

Also you need to realise most guys have problems eating enough and gaining when they're younger. But that doesn't mean it's a waste, even though it might seem so. What happens is you create a base by increasing the number of muscle cells, improving your nervous system and strengthening your frame. So when you're older, it's easy to blow up in size.

To use an analogy: if you're a gifted musician, and 5'6", it is a stupid idea to train 8hrs everyday on a basketball court to go from a C- basket ball player to a C+. You'd focus on your music, because the world most rewards the outstanding, not the "not quite as bad as they used to be".

I think a better analogy would be if you're just 5'4, would it make sense to put in a hella effort to become 5'6 the next year, knowing that you could be 5'8 the year after and end up over 6'? I mean you'd still be smaller than the average guy after one year, but atleast you'd be less small. Erm yeah, it would make sense. Being bigger to a certain extent is a major asset, and the longer out you are on the wrong side of the bell curve, the worse.

 

[Phoenix]

My point here was you seemed to think 3 kilos of muscle in 5 months was little. Well, it's not. It's normal. And especially if you're only 60% of the size of a normal guy. That would suggest you have a small frame (lithe bones, small chest and general build), and increasing your muscle mass occurs in relation to your frame. So large frame, large gains, small frame small gains. And your frame, bone density and thickness will actually grow from resistance training, but that takes years, not 5 months.

My frame is actually pretty good, bone lengths are decent, as far as skeletal system goes the "triangle" shape etc is good.
My point is that the workload to get those 3kg is so excessive, especially when it won't even let you approach the size of other guys who aren't doing any work at all, that investing it elsewhere (and indeed living in other countries as someone mentioned) is a wiser course of action unless you can apply drugs to the problem.

It's hard for me to pinpoint the exact cause, but maybe you need to start at a lower level of exertion. If you're having a hard time opening the door on your way out the gym, chances are you're working out too hard. But with time, your nervous system and body develops. Or it might just a system shock you'll overcome because you're small at the moment.

Prior to those 5 months I was working out at a more sporadic intensity, over the course of about a year. The primary reason the hardcore 5 months stopped was a total physical and mental burnout as a result of work stress ramping up on top of everything else.

This always goes the same way: if you do X, and you don't get results, everybody says "do more of X", if that doesn't work, "do less of X". However if you do X and you get results: "ok you're doing the right amount". It's not actually advice, it's just guessing. Especially when the actual reason is staring you right in the face: there is another factor Z at play.

It's hard for you to pinpoint the exact cause because it's barred from your mind: the idea that genetics can trump effort. We all want to put height in the 100% fixed/genetics camp, and everything else in the 100% willpower and action camp. While it's a noble sentiment, if it's simply not true in a certain case, there can be more to lose than gain. It is not 100% will power: it's is on a bell curve with genetics a very strong component.

I accept for most men, an inferior physique is their own doing. But to say that applies in my case is to say the heavyweight boxer defeated the featherweight due to superior technique -- something we might call a cult of willpower, that spirit can always prevail over the physical no matter what.

I also don't agree you should just do it anyway for fitness. For fitness I'll just swim, which I think is the best overall exercise you can do. The only real reason to specifically do weightlifting outside of sport, is to increase your musculature such that you become more attractive to women, and to a lesser extent more respected by men. If that is simply impossible to attain because you can't even approach the resting musculature of the average man, with massive levels of exertion which end up burning you out, it is clearly an uncompetitive decision in the game of life.

 

[zatara]

I think the main problem is that most guys in the thread will agree you didn't give it enough of a chance. If one of your friends started a new career, but after 5 months decided he was going to give up and never do it again what would you say it to him? If one of your friends started reading Roosh and gaming girls, but after 5 months gave up and said he was never going to do it again what would you say to him? Its just not long enough to have tried properly.

Its all well and good you blaming your genetics, but when you didn't stick with it long enough to give it a proper chance it just sounds like you're making excuses. Putting on 3KG in 5 months suggests your genetics aren't that bad, either - its more your mindset. You're the one who decided it was too slow progress, when its actually quite decent.

If the eating was 80% of the reason you gave up as you say it just speaks volumes to this. Most of us former skinny guys went through eating shitloads too, and it does suck. But a) your body adjusts gradually over time and b) you can easily find ways around it. You can eat normal social meals with other people, just supplement them with extremely calorie dense shakes and you'll get there. Full fat milk + peanut butter + protein powder can get you a high protein 1k+ kcal shake very easily. 3 of them a day on top of normal food and you're flying.

edit: to put this in reverse, what do you think of fat girls who blame their fatness on "genetics"? Because thats the exact same as small guys doing so with their skinniness. Do some people find it harder to gain/lose weight than others? Sure. But in 99.9% of cases its entirely within both fat girls, and skinny guys, control to change this situation if they work hard enough - but they're happier settling for the lazy "bad genetics" excuse.

edit2: I do also hope you'll take myself and the others posts' as constructive criticism rather than attacks (thats how my posts are intended anyhow) and maybe try and reconsider giving weightlifting another proper attempt.

 

[Phoenix]

You can eat normal social meals with other people, just supplement them with extremely calorie dense shakes and you'll get there. Full fat milk + peanut butter + protein powder can get you a high protein 1k+ kcal shake very easily. 3 of them a day on top of normal food and you're flying.

Yes yes, all that was done. GOMAD was done. Shakes twice as dense as that recipe was done. The super nutrition-dense liquid stuff hospitals feed to decrepit people was done (on top of other meals). To reiterate: the 5 months ended primarily due to a total physical/mental burnout, such that it was only a fluke of temporary market conditions and some other factors that I didn't end up getting fired.

To follow your other analogy, if he did those 2 things hardcore for 5 months, and everyone else was promoted except him; or all his non-gaming friends got laid except him, yes I would say give up. I wouldn't say give up on everything, I'd say "try something else".

Everything has a cost. You wouldn't get a microwave if it cost 50% of your income every month. To condense my point: some men, albeit very few, should not weight lift as part of their self-improvement, but should do something else.

And to address the edits:
You are simply not listening to what I'm saying. You're trying to narrow this debate to "anyone can change their body". I am not debating that fact, I am debating that it is always worth it; return on investment etc.

On the "proper attempt" I assume you mean sustained at the same previous level over 2 years: simply can't be done because I need that mass of time and energy for other important projects I'm working on. I would be in a massively worse position in 2 years if made that decision.

 

[Lechon]

It's hard for you to pinpoint the exact cause because it's barred from your mind: the idea that genetics can trump effort. We all want to put height in the 100% fixed/genetics camp, and everything else in the 100% willpower and action camp. While it's a noble sentiment, if it's simply not true in a certain case, there can be more to lose than gain. It is not 100% will power: it's is on a bell curve with genetics a very strong component.

Most people with any knowledge about resistance training will say genetics is a strong component. But what that means in practice is only a small percentage will end up with gobs and gobs of superfluous muscle. Even people on the wrong side of the bell curve can become pretty big and muscular compared to someone who does no training. And with the gains you posted I'm not even sure you're on the wrong side of the curve, you seem to be in the middle of it.

I also don't agree you should just do it anyway for fitness. For fitness I'll just swim, which I think is the best overall exercise you can do. The only real reason to specifically do weightlifting outside of sport, is to increase your musculature such that you become more attractive to women, and to a lesser extent more respected by men. If that is simply impossible to attain because you can't even approach the resting musculature of the average man, with massive levels of exertion which end up burning you out, it is clearly an uncompetitive decision in the game of life.

For me it's about being who I want to be. I want to be a powerfull, explosive male with large shoulders and a big chest, and generally on the muscular side. I also like to eat lots of delicious gourmet food, and weight training is a good way to keep the pounds where they're supposed to be. It actually also makes the food taste better, because when your body needs to nutrients, it rewards you with a sensation of pleasure.

Other than that, having a good deal of muscle is your best bet for graceful ageing. Muscle mass predicts senility. Bone density is gold when you get old. Cardio exercise usually just diminishes muscle mass, even if it's good for a lot of other things. Also, excess muscle gives a better hormone balance. And, as you say, it tends to attract women and dominate men.

But yeah, if you think the gains come at a huge price for you and aren't worth it, don't do it. Your gains seem fine to me and everyone else in this thread except you, though.

 

[Hannibal]

If you don't mind me asking, what kind of digestive problems do you have?

You could give the targeted keto diet a try, slam shots of olive oil, take psyllium husk and eat fatty meats.

Then when you have to lift you drink some gatorade.

My girlfriend had 5 feet of intestine removed and she has digestive problems aside from that, one of the things she does to maintain any kind of weight at all is to not shy away from fats. I would almost say her diet is Zone-like (33/33/33 split). Helps out her micronutrient profile too.

Honestly, I would say you're not a bad candidate for a program like Power to the People where you just get as strong as you possibly can at a certain size and you don't lift to failure.

There was a guy who did that (CriticalMAS) and he put on twenty pounds of muscle over three years without once breaking a sweat. Self proclaimed ectomorph, "nothing ever worked for him" stickboy kind of guy.

You could do that for two or three days a week, spend 20 minutes at the gym each time and watch your strength slowly climb up without beating yourself to death or gorging.

That's a far cry from putting in too much effort for too little payoff and it would not detract much from any kind of schedule.

 

[Phoenix]

Dunno man, went to a bunch of different doctors asking for a detailed diagnosis, and the turds (GPs) just look at you with the "just hurry up and get out my office so I can collect my cheque" face, and mutter some vague stuff in a begrudging tone. Might just have been because they're Australians though.

Would be nice if one had said "ok take an MRI scan, ok see this here -- this is why you have the appetite and digestive throughput of a gnat". But that would require them giving a shit about anything and doing some work. I reckon society would be massively improved if you just annihilated the prescription system and cast 80% of those deadweights loose.

 

[zatara]

To follow your other analogy, if he did those 2 things hardcore for 5 months, and everyone else was promoted except him; or all his non-gaming friends got laid except him, yes I would say give up. I wouldn't say give up on everything, I'd say "try something else".

Everything has a cost. You wouldn't get a microwave if it cost 50% of your income every month. To condense my point: some men, albeit very few, should not weight lift as part of their self-improvement, but should do something else.

And to address the edits:
You are simply not listening to what I'm saying. You're trying to narrow this debate to "anyone can change their body". I am not debating that fact, I am debating that it is always worth it; return on investment etc.

On the "proper attempt" I assume you mean sustained at the same previous level over 2 years: simply can't be done because I need that mass of time and energy for other important projects I'm working on. I would be in a massively worse position in 2 years if made that decision.

I really don't think anyone should be giving up on a career, or women, or weightlifting after 5 months. If you think thats long enough to have put a decent effort into something that probably doesn't speak much to your work ethic. After 5 months of a job, or being single, or weightlifting, almost nobody is good at them. It takes hard work and practice to improve.

I think thats where our lines are crossed, so. Primarily, I don't understand how 3-4 hours a week of anything could be a "mass of time and energy" so desperately needed for other projects. Weightlifting just doesn't have to take up that much of your time - and the time it does take up provides a nice distraction from more intellectually draining pursuits. Thats why I think any man can benefit from it, not many things in life give such a big return on time invested, especially without being mentally taxing (and as such a distraction from their career).

To sum up, you:

- Initially claimed you'd made "a serious, sustained and honest crack at gaining weight" - only to be corrected by many in the thread that 5 months wasn't near long enough for this
- Then said weightlifting was pointless because you "only" gained 3KG of weight in 5 months - again only to be corrected by many in the thread that this is actually quite good going
- Blamed the fact you are too small to begin with/live in Australia so physical competition is too high for you to even bother trying - which Lechon's height analogy counter-explained well.
- Next, blamed the fact it took up too much time - comparing it to your microwave costing 50% of income analogy, your basketball playing 8 hours a day analogy - again only to be told it needn't be more than 3 hours a week
- Finally, blamed the fact that eating was too hard. Despite the fact this is the easiest thing to overcome.

It does just look like you're desperately looking for excuses not to weightlift. Which is fine, if you're set in your (incorrect) view, it will only negatively impact your life. But you really shouldn't advise others not to weightlift when they stand to benefit from it, its quite negative life advice.

 

[Phoenix]

^ Nah, you're just being smug and dismissive, feel free to continue enjoying that. There isn't a single thing I or anyone else could possible say, even "I don't have a stomach" or "I have muscular dystrophy", that would get you off your "just try harder" moral high horse. Saying eating is the easiest thing to overcome, after going over in detail why everthing has been tried including using the stuff hospitals use. No doubt being arrogant on the Internet makes you feel more confident in yourself, and that's fine, we all have our crutches. Don't let the facts or anything the other person says get in the way of that. After all, the most important thing isn't being reasonable but sounding more righteous that the other guy.

Feel free to continue indulging in your smug dad trolling, your ignorance of all my "opportunity cost" arguments so you can continue your smug berating "desperately looking for excuses" lines. I hope you enjoy sitting on that little high horse of yours, but since your feed of text is worthless and self-serving, it's now blocked.

 

[Phoenix]

To anybody else (people capable of debating reasonably and in good faith, and are capable of more than drone-like virtue signaling, and who don't ignore presented information that gets in the way of their desire to virtue signal, i.e. almost all of the rest of the membership):

Should a man's investment into body building be unlimited and without regard to the payoff and opportunity costs?

That is, if the cost is genuinely high (e.g. 3-4 hours unpleasant force feeding per day), and the possible payoff is nil (because every other man will be more muscular anyway), should it be done anyway?

Or more simply: do you believe the relative value of muscular gains is infinite?