Getting kind of sick of people just linking random links and expecting that to suffice as an argument.
No, it doesn't.
It directly supports my argument. Compare group 2 and group 3 on bench-press and squatting exercises. Group 3 have an 11% better improvement than group 2 at bench-press (comparatively), and NEARLY DOUBLE the improvement at squatting than group 2 (again, comparatively).
This ABSOLUTELY CONFIRMS MY ARGUMENT.
Please DrHax, at least read your links before posting!!!!!!!
Originally Posted by
Dscigs
Same principle, different methods.
I doubt it was any easier for cavemen to kill mammoths or sabre-teeth. Or any easier for African tribes to hunt elephants now a days.
As well, not all civilizations have used drugs. We don't see any during aboriginal times or the revolution. As well as none during the stone and dark ages.
Just doing your normal everyday things is not exercise.
We are talking about exercise as specific training. If ancient cavemen trained their sprinting, practiced throwing spears at targets, etc, then maybe we can say it was like a naive ancient form of exercise.
But it's absurd to compare something like that to modern training methods and the sheer volume of training.
Drugs have existed in aboriginal times in many civilizations though. Perhaps we should allow drugs only for them?