This woman exercised a lot.

"Chris Braun" wrote in message
...
On 15 Feb 2005 12:10:29 GMT, Ignoramus29573
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 11:20:19 GMT, Chris Braun
wrote:
On 15 Feb 2005 04:19:48 GMT, Ignoramus17647
wrote:


http://www.pamfranklin.com/5-3-2003.JPG

Yeah. There are lots of women bodybuilders out there who look like
that. Like male bodybuilders, they look pretty normal when they're
not flexing. It's hard for a woman to get that much muscle and be
lean enough for it to show. (For that matter, it's not easy for
anyone. Drugs help.) Bodybuilders follow a pretty difficult diet
cycle of gaining and then cutting.

It must require a lot of work, even with drugs.

I doubt it's all that good for one, but don't really know.

I am curious if, in fact, having "too much" muscle is or is not
healthful.

Well, I think it's the diet cycling that's unhealthful -- and of
course some of the drugs some bodybuilders use. I don't think I've
heard any evidence that having larger amounts of muscle is harmful.

Right. Her website claims she dieted down to 7% body fat. I don't believe
that number as I don't believe some of the measurements she posted but her
bodyfat certainly is low.

In general muscle development, if done naturally, is somewhat
self-limiting. I don't think it would be possible to develop
naturally and cause oneself harm doing so.

The woman in the picture probably doesn't have a whole lot more muscle
than lots of other women athletes, really; what she has is lower
bodyfat. Low bodyfat levels can be unhealthy in women.

Well Ig didn't post the best pic. Here is the back double bicep from
contest:
http://www.pamfranklin.com/photogall...asters%202.jpg

It looks to me like she has size along with definition. I browsed her site
and didn't see any claims of being a "natural" bodybuilder so I would assume
she was drug-assisted at least sometime during her career. But even then,
like you say, she wouldn't look odd if you saw her in clothes walking down
the street.
--
Matthew
185/177/160

On 15 Feb 2005 04:19:48 GMT, Ignoramus17647 wrote:

http://www.pamfranklin.com/5-3-2003.JPG

With serious plastic surgery to go alone with it.

She has alot of money invested into that body, that's for sure.

Succorso wrote in message
...
Ignoramus17647 wrote:
http://www.pamfranklin.com/5-3-2003.JPG


I don't think "women" like that can develop that kind of muscle without
pharmaceutical help; naturally women don't bulk up when working out, as
that requires hormones they just don't have (at least, not in the right
quantities). So, I would suspect "she" at least used a steroid or
testosterone based drug of some kind.

For most women, this is true. But there are genetic outlyers.

From a purely sexist POV (no apology given), despite the well developed
jugs, it would just be too much like ****ing a bloke; that look does
nothing for me whatsoever

Not the most attractive look to me either, but I still admire it for the
discipline it took to acheive.
--
Matthew
185/177/160

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 06:34:17 -0700, "Matthew Venhaus"
wrote:

Well Ig didn't post the best pic. Here is the back double bicep from
contest:
http://www.pamfranklin.com/photogall...asters%202.jpg

Wow, yeah!

It looks to me like she has size along with definition. I browsed her site
and didn't see any claims of being a "natural" bodybuilder so I would assume
she was drug-assisted at least sometime during her career. But even then,
like you say, she wouldn't look odd if you saw her in clothes walking down
the street.

I think this is something a lot of people don't realize about
bodybuilders when they see posing pictures. Most of these people look
pretty normal in real life.

Chris
262/130s/130s
started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 07:11:59 -0700, "Matthew Venhaus"
wrote:


Succorso wrote in message
...
Ignoramus17647 wrote:
http://www.pamfranklin.com/5-3-2003.JPG


I don't think "women" like that can develop that kind of muscle without
pharmaceutical help; naturally women don't bulk up when working out, as
that requires hormones they just don't have (at least, not in the right
quantities). So, I would suspect "she" at least used a steroid or
testosterone based drug of some kind.

For most women, this is true. But there are genetic outlyers.

From a purely sexist POV (no apology given), despite the well developed
jugs, it would just be too much like ****ing a bloke; that look does
nothing for me whatsoever

Not the most attractive look to me either, but I still admire it for the
discipline it took to acheive.

I just kind of look at it as a sport -- not my choice, but a valid
choice. And from my own training I recognize what it takes to get
there.

Chris
262/130s/130s
started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004

Succorso wrote in message
...

I don't think "women" like that can develop that kind of muscle without
pharmaceutical help; naturally women don't bulk up when working out, as
that requires hormones they just don't have (at least, not in the right
quantities). So, I would suspect "she" at least used a steroid or
testosterone based drug of some kind.

For most women, this is true. But there are genetic outlyers.

I wanted to verify a few facts before I posted this example. Cheryl Hayworth
has been a drug-tested athlete at least since she was 15 and she can lift
more than most college football players.
--
Matthew
185/177/160

Ignoramus17647 wrote:
http://www.pamfranklin.com/5-3-2003.JPG



Personally, I think that women who have such defined physiques like
this woman (and you have to remember she is a 'professional
bodybuilder' not the average woman)still tend to perpetrate the ongoing
myth that if you're a woman and pick up a weight you will 'bulk up'. Of
course not so. But I think a MUCH better example of what weightlifting
can do would be a person like Mina Hobbi, who lost 85lbs, lifted
weights and became a new person (as seen also on Oprah the other day):
http://www.minahobbi.com/


joni
*as Oprah said, 'Amazing!'

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 09:30:54 -0700, "Matthew Venhaus"
wrote:


Succorso wrote in message
...

I don't think "women" like that can develop that kind of muscle without
pharmaceutical help; naturally women don't bulk up when working out, as
that requires hormones they just don't have (at least, not in the right
quantities). So, I would suspect "she" at least used a steroid or
testosterone based drug of some kind.

For most women, this is true. But there are genetic outlyers.

I wanted to verify a few facts before I posted this example. Cheryl Hayworth
has been a drug-tested athlete at least since she was 15 and she can lift
more than most college football players.

She's kind of a genetic outlier too, I think :-). Apparently she just
walked into a gym one day as a pre-teen and benched 225 or so. I've
met her, by the way, when I went to the masters nationals in Savannah
last year -- a really cool person.

Chris
262/130s/130s
started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004

On 15 Feb 2005 17:29:07 GMT, Ignoramus29573
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 15:44:10 GMT, Chris Braun wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 07:11:59 -0700, "Matthew Venhaus"
wrote:


Succorso wrote in message
.. .
Ignoramus17647 wrote:
http://www.pamfranklin.com/5-3-2003.JPG


I don't think "women" like that can develop that kind of muscle without
pharmaceutical help; naturally women don't bulk up when working out, as
that requires hormones they just don't have (at least, not in the right
quantities). So, I would suspect "she" at least used a steroid or
testosterone based drug of some kind.

For most women, this is true. But there are genetic outlyers.

From a purely sexist POV (no apology given), despite the well developed
jugs, it would just be too much like ****ing a bloke; that look does
nothing for me whatsoever

Not the most attractive look to me either, but I still admire it for the
discipline it took to acheive.

I just kind of look at it as a sport -- not my choice, but a valid
choice. And from my own training I recognize what it takes to get
there.

Do you also consider yourself a "bodybuilder"? (going for muscle size
and definition)? Or are you training for strength, which is what, I
believe, you said many times?

I am definitely not a bodybuilder. It's fun to have some visible
muscle, but it's not why I do it. It's the strength aspect that I
enjoy. This may seem a somewhat subtle distinction to those who don't
do either, but they're really pretty distinct sports. And the lifting
programs as well as dietary programs are quite dissimilar.

There is, by the way, a bodybuilding-related sport for women called
fitness competition. All those models in the women's fitness
magazines do this stuff. These women do bodybuilding but aren't going
for the heavily-muscled look -- more sort of proportional. They
compete in fitness events -- obstacle courses, aerobic dance, and that
sort of thing -- as well as in "figure" modeling. Many of them are
ex-gymnasts. This one is a trainer at our gym and a friend of mine:

http://www.womenstrifitness.com/phot...n&cat=-4&pos=3

She's also on the cover of the latest "Muscle and Fitness Hers"
magazine:

http://www.muscleandfitnesshers.com/

Clearly Gail has a lot of definition, but it wouldn't be that obvious
when she's not posing. She's quite a small girl -- probably a size 2
or so. She has a just-about-perfect body, and is also extremely fit
(She's also about 23 years old.)

Chris

Chris
262/130s/130s
started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004

On 15 Feb 2005 09:03:31 -0800, "joni" wrote:

Ignoramus17647 wrote:
http://www.pamfranklin.com/5-3-2003.JPG



Personally, I think that women who have such defined physiques like
this woman (and you have to remember she is a 'professional
bodybuilder' not the average woman)still tend to perpetrate the ongoing
myth that if you're a woman and pick up a weight you will 'bulk up'. Of
course not so. But I think a MUCH better example of what weightlifting
can do would be a person like Mina Hobbi, who lost 85lbs, lifted
weights and became a new person (as seen also on Oprah the other day):
http://www.minahobbi.com/


joni
*as Oprah said, 'Amazing!'

Well, I lift weights, have lost 129 lbs., and am not "bulky". And I'm
not selling anything :-).


Chris
262/130s/130s
started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004