Muscle Fascia Stretching

You may have heard of the idea of muscle fascia stretching to help increase muscle growth. What is the muscle fascia and is there any scientific evidence these help support muscle growth?

What is the muscle fascia?

Muscle fascia is a very tough material that surrounds individual muscles and muscle groups. It hugs the muscles very tightly.

Research on muscle fascia helping muscle growth:

I could not find any studies, where it directly supported that muscle fascia stretching increases muscle growth. Right now it is mostly based on indirect scientific studies, anatomy, and ancedotal evidence. The theory seems to have got started because people who used to have muscle (or were even fat), had a easier time putting back on muscle, called "muscle memory".

Other supporting evidence, is that bodybuilders who spot inject site enhancement oil. This is where they inject a oil into a muscle in order to bring up a lagging muscle. The most notorious user of this was Greg Valentino, who went overboard and has made his body look ridiculous. Many people assume that the oil is causing temporary muscle gain, but in fact based on user experience it appears to cause actual long term muscle gain as the result of stretching the muscle fascia. Many pro-bodybuilders, such as Olympia winners Jay Cutler and Arnold Schwarzennegar, do forms of weighted fascia stretching as part of their workouts.

It is reasonable to assume from all this, that muscle fascia should help make muscle gains easier. If you are looking for scientific research, surprisingly there is another reason why muscle fascia may help muscle growth. You can read more about it in a previous article I wrote:Does hyperplasia cause growth in human skeletal muscle?

With the evidence on hyperplasia and muscle fascia, I have no doubt that muscle fascia stretching will help boost your muscle growth. I recently started incorporating it into my workouts.

How to stretch the muscle fascia tissue:

Muscle fascia stretching should be done after a good muscle pump from your workout. All fascia stretching is done at the bottom of the negative rep for a good long stretch of 30 seconds to one minute. For example if your doing chest, after your chest workout sets, hold a good long weighted fascia stretch with a chest flye at the bottom. Make sure you don't lower the weight to the point of pain. You should feel a stretch and it should be tough to hold, but it should not be excessive as it will cause injury.

Muscle fascia stretching automatically grow muscle?

No. You will still need to train hard and increase calories and protein. The muscle fascia tissue is stretched which allows the opportunityof muscle growth to happen. If you don't stimulate it by bulking and weight training, you won't notice any gains.

Does Enzyte & Maxoderm Work?

Perhaps you seen the late night programming of that guy talking with a bunch of girls about penis size and pushing maxoderm. Who could also forget the cheesy guy with a large constant smile advertising enzyte.


Maxoderm and enzyte give the impression that they are penis enlargement pills through their advertising. Does maxoderm and enzyte really increase penis size or are they total junk? Being well versed in the bodybuilding and supplement industry, I decided to research the ingredients of these supplements to find the answer.

About Enzyte:

Enzyte's slogan is "once a day tablet for male enhancement". The commercial and ads give the impression that it is for penis enlargement. Taking a look at the ingredients there is many herbs, many of which I recognize. The most prominent igredients they have that might deal with sexual health are arginine, tribulus, and horny goat weed. They also are not near the top of the ingredient list, so all are low concentration.

Arginine is what many bodybuilders take for their no2 supplements. no2 supplements are supposed to convert to nitric oxide in the body. Viagra also works on nitric oxide. However, science says that no2 supplements do not work. You can read a previous article I did on the science of no2 (arginine) supplements here. Tribulus and possibly horny goat weed, might increase libido, but do little for actual erections. At one time, enzyte actually claimed outright, it increased penis size. They eventually had lawsuits filed against them and retracted those claims.

About Maxoderm:

Maxoderm like enzyte, also uses the term "male enhancement" for the purpose of taking their supplement. In their paid programming program on T.V, they have girls talking about the importance of penis size, then the host implies that maxoderm will help you. Maxoderm has different ingredients and in very different amounts compared to enzyte. The first two ingredients are yohimbe and arginine. Unlike arginine, yohimbe might be beneficial for erection strength and stamina, but certainly not for increasing actual penis size either.

Does hyperplasia cause growth in human skeletal muscles?

The possible role of hyperplasia in muscle growth, is a big debate in excercise science and among bodybuilders. Most bodybuilders accept that it doesn't happen in human skeletal muscle. But are they too easy to dismiss overwhelming evidence?

Two types of muscle growth?

The traditional common belief in muscle growth is in hypertrophy. This theory says that each individual muscle fiber gets thicker due to increased protein retention(due to increased protein synthesis). The increase of size of many individual fibers, in turn makes the entire muscle bigger in diameter.

The opposite theory is hyperplasia. Hyperplasia theory says muscle fibers stay the same, but the muscle cells divide creating more fibers. More fibers at the same size increases the diameter of the muscle overall.

The argument:

No one is arguing that hyperplasia doesn't happen in smooth muscles like the intestines of humans. We have done studies on other animals and know it for certain happens in other animal's skeletal issues. The controversy for experts, comes down to whether the muscle hypertrophy exists in skeletal muscles of humans. The common belief has been that we are born with a certain specific amount of muscle fibers. They believe that muscle hyperplasia is only possible in very abnormal circumstances, such as muscular dystrophy or pregnant women's abdomen.

Studies supporting hyperplasia in animal skeletal muscles:

Dr. Gonyea put weights on cats to test for hyperplasia. His results showed a 20% increase in number of muscle fibers. The results were controversial because scientist said it couldn't apply to humans or because of the method he used to determine new muscle fibers. There have been other studies done on birds and rats that also support hyperplasia for them also.

Studies supporting hyperplasia theory for humans:

Muscle fibers contain tens of thousands of fibers. The problem with doing hyperplasia studies is it involves counting the fibers. Not to mention some of the studies that they do on animals, won't be considered as ethical or possible with humans. It would require the removal of muscle cells causing the tissue is partially destroyed. Luckily, you can still draw conclusions of hyperplasia by using proportions.

Scientists by the name Tesch and Larsson, in 1982 did a fine needle biopsy comparison of 3 groups of athletes: competitive bodybuilders, powerlifters, untrained individuals. Interesting enough the muscle fibers were found smaller in the competitive bodybuilders than in powerlifters and the same size as the untrained. The study was confirmed again when redone in 1986. If hyperplasia is not possible, then how can large bodybuilders have the same muscle fiber diameter as untrained individuals?

Another interesting study done by the American College of Sports Medicine's Medicine and Science in Sport and Exercise found it in powerlifters who use steroids.

Studies supporting muscle hypertrophy theory:

To make matters confusing, there have been multiple studies that show evidence for muscle hypertrophy instead of hyperplasia theory. Using similiar methods of measuring proportions as the previous studies, they found that muscle size increased without a change in muscle fiber number.


Why do the studies give such conflicting results? I personally am of the belief that both hyperplasia and hypertrophy happen. Hyperplasia probably happens only as a result of certain types of training or possibly only from steroid use. That is the only logical explanation I could see from why some studies give different results, yet are scientifically sound. If hyperplasia is possible in other animals and there is supporting research in humans, there is no reason not to strongly believe it happens in humans.

Training to stimulate hyperplasia:

If hyperplasia is possible, which seems highly likely, the next question is, how can we stimulate it? One study by the Journal of Applied Physiology in October 1996 Mechanical overload and skeletal muscle fiber hyperplasia: a meta-analysis seems to help possibly answer that question. They had mechanical overload into 3 groups on several animal species: stretch, excercise, and compensatory. The stretch group had by far the most hyperplasia and the excercise group had the second most.

This research and other studies suggest that emphasis should be put on the negative portion of the rep, especially at the bottom. Slow deliberate negatives on each rep could help stimulate hyperplasia. A much better way to induce hyperplasia however, would be to get a good stretch at the end of a negative rep and hold it. For example, after a few sets of chest excercises, position a weight at the bottom of a chest flye negative portion of rep. Hold the weight at the bottom for a good stretch of about 30 seconds to one minute.

After you are done with back excercises you can get a good long weighted stretch of the lats at the bottom of a negative rep for the bent over row or pullup. Make sure when you do these stretches that you don't overdo it and that you have a nice pump from previous sets. For shrugs you will have to hold the barbell weight behind your back and get a good stretch.

Arnold Schwarzennegar was known for holding the weight and getting a good squeeze when doing chest flyes after a good chest workout. He also was known for having one of the best chests ever. As you seen from this article, it probably was more than coincidental.

There is yet another reason why a good deep static stretch could be stimulating to muscle growth, besides stimulating hyperplasia. The answer is due to the fact it will also stretch muscle fascia. I wrote a article on the issue here: Muscle fascia stretching

Superdrol: what is it?

Superdrol has been one of the hottest supplements to hit the market for bodybuilders in the last few years. The term “pro hormone” and "legal steroid" have been thrown around to describe this compound. What is superdrol and why the hype?

About superdrol:

Superdrol is the brand name of the original supplement to hit the market, which contained the compound Methasterone ( 2a, 17a-dimethyl-5a-androstane-3-one-17ß-ol). Since then, it has been renamed other brand names, such as testadrol and superdrol NG.

Superdrol has many similiarities to methyl-1-test (17alpha methyl-17beta-hydroxy-androst-1-ene-3-one) the methylated version of 1-testosterone, both now banned by the "pro-hormone ban" legislation in 05. Both superdrol and methyl-1-testosterone compounds are a derivative of dihydrotestosterone (5 alpha reduced steroids), methylated, low androgenic to anabolic ratio, and do not aromoatize to estrogen. You can read more about 1 testosterone, the history of "pro-hormones" and the ban, in a previous article of mine here

Like with methyl-1-testosterone, Superdrol's most noticeable immediate effects are usually quick bloated gains, lethargy, high blood pressure, muscle cramping, dark urine, and changes in cholesterol,liver, and kidney profiles. The diuretic effect and quick bloated gains, is probably due to it being a 17aa steroid like methyl-1-testosterone.

Some may wonder how can superdrol cause massive quick
water retention if it doesn't aromatize to estrogen? 17aa steroids seem to upregulate the glucocorticoid receptor. Glucocorticoid receptor controls sodium retention. In other words, increasing sodium in your diet would probably have a similiar effect as superdrol does in rapidly increasing water retention. This probably also explains why methyl-1-test (as a 17aa) was so much more potent in increasing bodyweight than 1-test. Although methyl-1-test and 1-test was banned, superdrol seems to be a good substitute for it still available on the market.

Is superdrol dangerous?

Superdrol has the same side effects that are possible with any other steroid. Superdrol is in particular more harder on the kidneys and liver, than most other steroids even though it's over the counter. The diuretic effects and increased blood pressure, makes it hard on the kidneys. As a methylated steroid it will also be hard on the liver.

Sure you can reduce salt in your diet and drink more water, but part of the reason for the massive gains in the first place, is due to the salt and water retention. Taking liver supplements like NAC and milk thistle during a cycle, is like putting a bandaid on a gunshot wound.

Don't expect the gains to last long as most of it is temporary weight gain and the upregulation of the glucocorticoid will only make recovery post cycle even more difficult. Given enough time off cycle(it may take months), you probably won't retain any muscle you gained from superdrol cycles. I know this all too well, from my experience with methyl-1-test.

Am I against the use of Superdrol? No, people should be allowed to take what they want if they choose, as long as they are responsible adults and are full aware of the effects.

Isometric Weight Training as Effective as Dynamic?

Over the years, certain bodybuilding gurus have advocated isometric weight training over dynamic training. They claimed that isometric will give you the same or better muscle gains as dynamic, without the risk of injury or joint problems. Dynamic weight training is the “normal” way of lifting a weight. Isometric training is where you hold a heavy weight in place. For exampale, with isometric bench press you lower lower the weight half way to your chest and hold it till you get tired.

Most bodybuilders will quickly discount these people, but what does science say on the issue?

Summary of study:

A comprehensive research study came out 2 months ago from Göteborg University in Sweden. The study compared isometric training to dynamic training. They also compared it together with volume, frequency, and intensity variables. The method of analysis for finding research results, was to find correlations among dozens of previous studies.

What were the results of this comprehensive study? It found that when analyzing all the different studies, they could not find a statistically significant difference between the weight training routines in inducing muscle growth.

Final thoughts:

One must keep in mind this is a comprehensive study. Comparing studies to other studies, is not the same thing as doing one very large study. Every study is going to have specific variables that make it unique and lumping many studies together to draw conclusions, isn't the most scientific way to do that. This is especially true in excercise science, which has many complex variables such as diet, genetics, routine, training experience, among each study group.

As a result, I am not ready to conclude that isometric is just as good as regular training for muscle gains just because of this study. It is very interesting results though, which certainly points to the possibility, that maybe the isometric advocates are not wrong afterall. I will wait for more research though before I make this conclusion.

Blood N Guts – Dorian Yates Book Review

Dorian Yates is one of my favorite pro-bodybuilders of all time. He is known for his amazing lat spread, unreal muscle hardness, 6 Mr. Olympia titles during the 90’s, and his training style.

I read this book a few months ago and decided to review it now, for people who might be thinking of buying it.

The book first goes into Dorian's beginnings as a teen. Dorian didn't have it easy, like many other pro-bodybuilders. He started out as a bit of a thug and rebel. When he got put into a correction facility as a teen, he decided to make a change in his life. It wasn't until he was in his 20's, he became a serious bodybuilder.

It is amazing that not only was he able to change his life around, but start bodybuilding so late and still get where he is today. It probably was a combination of unbelievable genetics (I think everyone agrees his genetics were unreal), but also high aspirations. Dorian Yates exhumed a lot of confidence about himself and was very goal orientated. The biography of his life could have been longer, as I found this part of the book a very good read and inspiration.

One striking difference between Dorian yates and many other pro bodybuilders is his training style. Dorian Yates followed Mike Mentzer's HIT low volume workout principles instead of the high volume. The book has pictures of excercises and examples of training splits. The book was made for both beginner and advanced bodybuilders. The nutritional part of the book is also practical advice, just like his training advice. Overall, I highly recommend this book as a good read for any serious aspiring bodybuilder.

You can purchase Blood and Guts at Amazon.

Muscle Size Proportional to Strength?

The ultimate goal of male bodybuilders is to increase muscle size as much as possible. We all have heard theories from bodybuilders about what causes strength and how it relates to muscle size. Is strength gains necessary to gain muscle or is muscle gains needed to gain strength? or perhaps science suggests there is no connection between muscle size and strength? Read on to find out the answer.

Studies have shown that muscle tissue has similiar "strength" in all people of equivalent sizes. They measure muscle size by cross sectional diameter and then testing the power output of a muscle fiber. If this is the case, then why do some people of similiar muscle size seem to be vary widely in strength during training?

Strength during actual weight lifting, is a result of a variety of factors. When you are an experienced powerlifter/bodybuilder, your weight training experience has adapted you to have a stronger neural connection. This allows you to be stronger than lesser experienced individuals. The type of training you do also can effect how strong these neural connections get. For example, people who do lower reps and heavier weight, can get stronger than those who do higher reps and lighter weight.

Some people are also naturally stronger per unit of muscle, due to anatomical differences. There have been studies showing muscle attachments can determine your natural strength. In other words, some people naturally start at a higher strength level before even lifting their first weight.

You may have heard it said here and elsewhere, that increasing strength ultimately leads to muscle gain. We know this to be false from experience, as we all know those skinny hardgainers who get much stronger, but never seem to gain a pound of muscle. Olympic gymnast often get much stronger without gaining substantial amount of mass. The increase in strength without muscle mass, is due to lack of calories in the hardgainers and very low reps and high weight in the olympic gymnast.

There is a limit how much strength you can ultimately gain without size. This is why you won't see small guys in any powerlifting competitions. One thing that will always be true, is if you gain muscle, strength will ALWAYS follow. If each muscle fiber has the same amount of strength, then the more you gain you should have a proportional increase in strength. If you aren't getting stronger, then you aren't gaining significant muscle. Sometimes strength can plateau because of lack of sleep or a hectic schedule, but in the long run you should get stronger if you gain muscle. Therefore, strength gains is probably the best indicator of actual muscle gains when trying a supplement or steroid, to see how well it works.


It can be kind of confusing to keep track of everything, so let's summarize it. Each pound of muscle inherently has roughly the amount of strength regardless of bodytype, training, or sex. Your strength during training, is the result of muscle size and anatomical differences and training experience. Muscle gains always lead to strength gains, but strength gains do not always produce muscle gains.

Do Steroids Cause Prostate Cancer?

This is a very common question among bodybuilders thinking of doing steroids. It also is a concern for middle aged men thinking of trying testosterone supplementation (Hormone replacement therapy). You may have read about some links between prostate cancer and steroids/HRT therapy. Is it really fact or is it just based on far reaching assumptions?

Steroids and prostate growth (BPH)

Before we discuss steroids and it's role on prostate cancer, first we must discuss steroids' possible actions on prostate growth (BPH). The prostate first grows during puberty. Then around 25, the prostate starts to grow again in a 2nd phase. The 2nd phase eventually may lead to prostate enlargement years down the road. Half the men in their 60's will have significant prostate enlargement.

Steroids(including normal testosterone in the body) stimulate the androgen receptors in the prostate. Excessive levels of androgenic steroids (such as through steroid use) causes prostate growth/enlargement called BPH (Benign prostate hyperplasia) in a short period of time. Once excessive system levels of androgenic steroids drops, than the prostate will start to shrink back again. It may not shrink completely back to it's former size however.

In non-steroid users, testosterone mainly causes it once it converts to DHT. DHT is much more androgenic(binds to the receptors stronger) than testosterone. The drug finasteride is prescribed to help alleviate prostate growth. It works by blocking the conversion of testosterone to DHT. Steroid users will often use finasteride, in order to block the effects of hair loss and prostate growth while on cycle.

BPH caused by Testosterone or Estrogen?

In non-steroid users, older men are afflicted with BPH. This seems backwards, since BPH is supposed to be correlated with high androgens right? We know that older men have lower testosterone(and DHT) levels, so how is this possible?

Well there is 3 basic theories on what causes BPH for non-steroid users. No one yet seems to know for certain which theory is correct.

Theory 1 - Excessive estrogen levels. Older men have a higher estrogen and lower testosterone levels. According to research, the use of anti-estrogens are well documented to help shrink the prostate. The famous steroid research chemist Patrick Arnold, has claimed that there is more evidence pointing to a high estrogen to low testosterone being the cause of BPH.

Theory 2 - Despite the lowering testosterone levels( and hence DHT) levels in older men, research suggests men still probably accumulate high levels of DHT in the prostate. This would explain why people why older men can still get BPH despite declining levels of testosterone and DHT in the body. Another fact to help support this theory, is that Men who don't produce DHT naturally due to genetic defect, also don't develop BPH.

Theory 3 - Genetic Programmed growth. The fact that prostate cells awaken again in the mid 20's to re-grow suggests that maybe BPH growth is programmed genetically. By the time men are in their 90's, 90% will suffer from BPH.

Other interesting study results: In one study, when estrogen and dht were both reduced with hormonal blockers, the prostate gland actually increased in size. This is startling since if one of these hormones is to play a role in BPH, why when reducing both, did it cause prostate growth?

What causes prostate cancer?

First we must realize BPH and prostate cancer are not the same thing. BPH is a condition of excessive growth of the prostate. They do not know currently, if BPH is a pre-cursor condition to prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is actually a very common occurence in men, much more than the public is aware. It is said that most men would die of prostate cancer, if they didn't die of something before that. Prostate cancer is usually very slow growing. Many elderly men live decades with prostate cancer and may not even know they have it.

The truth is, no one really knows what leads exactly to prostate cancer. There is a lot of conflicting data. In fact, if you look at many studies out there, most don't even show a link between prostate cancer and higher testosterone levels. Yet, many doctors seem to believe it does. Some recent studies have shown that there was no increased risk of prostate cancer based on testosterone levels. Many doctors who put middle aged men on testosterone replacement therapy, have not seen a higher incidence of prostate cancer developing. Doctors are also usually worried about BPH from testosterone, but men have actually had a reduction in their BPH from using testosterone hormone replacement therapy to treat low testosterone.

The fear of prostate cancer by doctors, is one reason why doctors are often hesitant to do HRT(hormone replacement therapy). HRT therapy is for older men and others deficient in testosterone, to bring them up to healthy levels. The January 2004 New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) wrote that testosterone does not cause prostate cancer, but they need to be monitored, since it may stimulate hidden prostate cancer. What do they mean by hidden prostate cancers? Apparently in about half the men over age 50, they may have prostate cancer, but it is asymptomatic. In other words, it is not growing and causing harm. If they were to supplement with testosterone, according to them, it may possibly stimulate these harbored cancer cells into a aggressive form of prostate cancer. That is why doctors will check for PSA(prostae specific antigen), BPH, and have more frequent prostate exams when starting HRT therapy. PSA is a very accurate marker of existing cancer and when it goes back to zero it means the person has been cured. Testosterone therapy could "awaken" these sleeper cancer cells. This is what they theorize, yet there is no scientific research to show that this is really what happens.

What we do know, is that there is many factors that might increase the risk of prostate cancer.

1) Increased ejaculation in your 20's. This may sound awkward, but there were some studies that recently came out with this result. They found that those who ejaculated a lot more frequently in their 20's, had less likely occurence of prostate cancer. The prostate gland is known to hold a much higher concentration of the bodies' toxins. The researchers believed that ejaculation may lead to "cleansing" the prostate from carcinogens (cancer causing toxins).

2) Genetics & Heredity - Prostate cancer also seems to run at a higher rate in families with a pre-disposition to it. There is currently research looking at various enzymes and prostate genes, that may be involved in developing the cancer. African americans also have a higher incidence of prostate cancer.

3) Diet/Environment - Diets high in animal fat increase incidence of prostate cancer. Men who moved from Japan where prostate cancer incidence is lower, had increased risk in their sons and grandsons when living in the U.S. Therefore, diet and other environmental factors seem to increase risk of prostate cancer.


Prostate cancer is caused by a variety of risk factors. Experts seem to continue to try and make this link between high testosterone levels (or other steroids) and prostate cancer, yet there is no real solid research proof that testosterone levels is the direct cause. There is a growing body of research showing there is no link and that it may be caused by other factors. If Testosterone and steroids caused prostate cancer, a lot of men at a young age would probably be getting prostate cancer.

How does weight training cause muscle growth?

One of the most core questions for every bodybuilder, is what are the mechanisms that cause muscle growth? Perhaps if we knew exactly the mechanisms, we could gear a diet and training routine around it. Let's discuss some of the major theories out there and the merit of them.

Muscle Damage Theory:

This theory will make a lot of sense to the novice bodybuilder, who is so sore they can barely walk after their first squat workout. Originally people thought lactic acid was the cause of muscle soreness and damage. It wasn't until they actually took a electron microscopic biopsy of the muscle tissue, that they could see what really happened.

They discovered that a small portion of the fibers had a disorderly pattern. They coined the term to describe this "micro tears". Upon further research they found that eccentric(the negative portion of a rep), did better than the positive in inducing this micro tear. The negative portion is therefore probably more important for muscle growth.

Muscle growth and hormone involvement:

We have been just focusing at the muscle aspect, but the whole body is involved in muscle growth and recovery through the
release of hormones. Muscle damage theory doesn't really answer a lot of questions. That is where another theory comes into play called, substrate accumulation theory. The theory basically believes, that muscle growth is a result of the release of the cascade of anabolic hormones post-workout.

We know the body releases and regulates levels of growth hormone, IGF-1, cortisol, adrenaline, testosterone, during and for many hours post-workout. The most important hormone involved during the muscle building process seems to be testosterone. Testosterone levels will dip low and not reach their peak again until somewhere around 48 hours after weight training.

The longest time protein synthesis lasts post workout for a muscle, is about 48 hours, but often lasts far less than that. Excessive cortisol levels, that start to increase post-workout, must go to a low level quickly again or else overtraining happens.

Which muscle growth theory is correct?

Both theories have flaws when looked at them independantly. For example, if you believed in substrate accumulation theory exclusively, then you would believe that taking a bunch of steroids without weight training could cause muscle growth.   You need muscles to be stimulated plus the hormonal response.  Both theories however, work well together. When they are put together, it seems to be the most plausible explanation.

Muscle Hyperplasia theory:

Unfortunately, it doesn't stop with those two theories. Another major theory is based on hyperplasia, which is a very controversial. Due to the complexity of this theory I wrote my own exclusive article on it: Does Hyperplasia Cause Growth in Human Skeletal Muscles?. It provides some interesting insight, including how to possibly stimulate hyperplasia, that you won't find anywhere else.

Does 17-HD work?

Awhile back someone gave me a few packets of some 17-HD from Vyotech Nutritionals. Is this supplement a steroid like supplement or just junk?

What does 17-HD contain

It contains a few herbal supplements(junk), but the main active ingredient behind the supplement is what they call 17-halo methyl-dianadrone. At first look of the name of the compount, it gives the impression of a halo based steroid, like halotestin or halodrol.

Is it a steroid/pro-hormone?

Despite the name of the compound, they market the product as a testosterone booster. To find out if this supplement works you would have to find out more about dianadrone. There is no results for dianadrone, methyl-dianadrone, or halo-methyl dianadrone in pubmed as far as studies. I couldn’t find any any information about this compound with real research studies, anywhere else either. It is nothing, but a fake name branded by this company. I wouldn't trust the studies Vyotech did, as obviously they will be biased. 17-HD looks like nothing but a junk supplement, full of unproven herbs.

What do other bodybuilders report?

Except for a few who probably report placebo gains, the vast majority notice nothing.

« Previous PageNext Page »