Posts by velvetfalcon44

Just caught a glimpse of what they've got over at Pronutrition,

Nicholas Kern90 said:well, if glucose isn't doing it for you, maybe give Maltodextrin a shot

Can you even find that stuff at Walmart or what?
I was reading somewhere that Scharzenberg recommends mixing whey with Maltodextrin for your post-workout meal.
But now I'm a little tripped up—aren't dextrose and Maltodextrin both complex carbs that won't spike your insulin? 🤷
If that's the case, how does it actually work for a post-workout shake?

Honey is solid—honestly, what's the issue? It’s got glucose and some fructose in there, but personally, I can't handle that pure glucose powder stuff; it absolutely wrecks my stomach and just irritates it way too much. Plus, you have to realize how many medicinal properties and minerals are actually packed into honey...
My go-to routine during workouts is mixing some honey with my whey and creatine ester, maybe tossing in a banana too.
And what's wrong with Rio Mare? They don't have those tiny little pieces you find in the cheap brands, which is why you end up paying a few extra bucks for them.$10
Lately, though, I've been sticking to Eva fillets because they actually feel like real food compared to that Rio Mare chicken.
If you want to do it right, just grab a solid tuna steak and sear it. That’s an actual meal, not these canned mess things.

Honestly, the MVP Iso Logic Neutral is the absolute gold standard when it comes to protein.
All that junk loaded with artificial sweeteners—aspartame, sucralose, or even worse, straight-up sugar—is total garbage in my book. I’m just not interested in poisoning myself.
As far as I can tell, aspartame is clearly bad news, and sucralose hasn't been studied nearly enough to make any real claims about its safety.
I don't touch glucose or refined sugar; I stick to honey. It feels way more natural on my stomach, even if there is some fruit sugar involved.
And seriously, get dairy out of your diet. Most people lose the ability to digest milk as they get older—any real bodybuilder knows this—so drinking milk is just a massive mistake. You've got the lactose, the fat, and all those other nasty additives to deal with.
When it comes to dairy, a bodybuilder's list should be pretty short—either plant-based or, even better, just plain oats. I usually just rinse them under water and eat the grains straight.
Also, let's be real: forget about trying to build muscle if you aren't prepared to drop thousands of dollars on protein tubs and high-quality groceries.
I’m talking about top-tier tuna, like Starkist or Bumble Bee, not that cheap five-dollar stuff$2.00that's basically toxic...
You need high-quality fish oil at pharmaceutical grade, packed with triple the EPA and DHA (not that low-grade stuff they sell with 120/180 concentrations)...etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.🙂

Noah Miller6 said:Everything is fine, I guess, except that absolute garbage site Imgur takes an entire hockey period just to load a single image.😁

And as for our buddy velvetfalcon44...
you totally botched the simplest installation imaginable...
next—next—you uncheck the box on the ASK toolbar and boom, it’s broken all over again...
🙏shame on you:

It’s not that I didn't do it right, it's more about this: you can't actually add anything to it—like dragging shortcuts from your desktop inside—plus they slapped that CSM label on the side, which looks pretty tacky if you ask me.

As for everything else, I've gotta say, it feels way smoother than Vista.

I freaking knew I was going to screw something up with this menu...
Installed it, but you can't actually add anything to it—like dragging shortcuts from the desktop right in there—plus they slapped some "CSmenu" label on the side.
2 . The Control Panel doesn't even have that classic icon layout anymore.
Uninstalling wasn't exactly a walk in the park either; Windows just doesn't handle these kinds of modifications very well. 🙄

I'm honestly just going back to the old way since it’s way more comfortable, but man, it wouldn't have killed them to just leave that feature in the new Windows 7.

Btw, how much RAM is the new Windows 7 eating up for you guys? I'm seeing less than 12 GB.

I’d bet anything they messed something up with how Windows Media Player handles full-screen mode.
I hit Alt+Enter—which is basically the same as F11—but once I exited full screen, I was left with this weird extra frame at the top.
That’s not really what I meant, though; when you launch it in a window (not full screen), it used to cover the whole display perfectly.
As for getting that Classic menu back, I just download it from http://www.csmenu.com/.
Honestly, I’m a bit nervous about installing stuff like that—if I end up breaking something in Windows, trying to roll back with System Restore can be a total nightmare. It’s such a headache.🤣
But man, I am so used to the Classic look. Guess I'll just have to deal with it like this for now.

Just finished my first install of Windows 7 32-bit and honestly, everything went super smooth 🙂
. Found my GPU drivers without any drama, and even the old drivers meant for Vista aren't giving me any grief—everything’s running like a charm, which is a nice change of pace from this forum constantly throwing those 504 Gateway Time-out errors at me 😠😠
.
Anyway, I've got two quick things I'm stuck on:
1: I've been hunting everywhere but I just can't figure out how to set it back to the Windows Classic start menu.
Back when I was using Vista, you had those options on the left side once you hopped into the Control Panel, but now it's just blank... I can't find where that setting moved to, assuming it even still exists.
2. When I pull up Windows Media Player, the taskbar stays stuck at the bottom . It wasn't like this in Vista—back then, when I maximized a window, it would actually fill the whole screen properly. How do I fix this without having to use the "auto-hide taskbar" trick? Is that the only way to get that extra screen space back?
Thanks.

Gerald Young73 said:I saw some proteins in pill or tablet form and was wondering—what’s the actual difference?div>

The big difference is that those tablets are usually just amino acids for overnight recovery or milk-based proteins,
whereas whey powder is whey, and if the tub says casein, it's casein—which is also that slow-digesting overnight stuff.
The real headache with the tablets is that there's only about 2 grams of protein per pill, so you'd basically have to swallow a handful of them every night, which just sits heavy in your stomach and they're tough to digest... honestly, most bodybuilders don't even mess with them anymore. They'll stick to casein before bed, or better yet, just grab some cottage cheese or tuna.
So yeah, forget the pills. If you want, I can sell you some I have lying around—they've been sitting for a few months. My buddy learned the hard way and ended up buying nearly 350 tablets.
If anyone wants them, I'll let them go for half price. At the local $83 shop, I'm offering them for 120.
They aren't bad at all, though my buddy doesn't use them anymore since he cooled off on the bodybuilding thing, and I personally just stick to tuna or light meals at night.

Here’s the info:

AMINO 2700/350 tabs (Universal)
AMINO 2700 is a high-performance amino acid blend designed to maximize muscle mass metabolism. The "2700" refers to the fact that each tablet weighs 2700 mg, with 70% being pure amino acids and the remaining 30% consisting of binders and fillers. These are formulated to digest slowly over 6-8 hours while you sleep, ensuring your body has enough raw material to build and maintain muscle tissue. AMINO 2700 contains both free l-amino acids and peptide-bonded l-amino acids. These are derived from pharmaceutical-grade lactalbumin, allowing for faster assimilation into the muscle tissue. These amino acids are entirely natural and act as natural anabolics. They are essential for building solid muscle during growth phases and maintaining it later on, serving as the fundamental building blocks for muscle tissue. All physiological processes related to sports performance rely on this amino acid chain: exercise leads to energy, which leads to recovery, which leads to muscle gains.

Composition:
1 serving *
alanine
133.99 mg
lysine
696.84 mg
histidine
193.99 mg
arginine
274.44 mg
threonine
313.56 mg
valine
371.11 mg
methionine
169.87 mg
isoleucine
453.04 mg
leucine
814.51 mg
phenylalanine
313.56 mg
aspartic acid
717.76 mg
serine
524.23 mg
glutamic acid
1049.64 mg
proline
529.68 mg
glycine
135.03 mg
alanine
324.00 mg
cysteine
209.11 mg
tyrosine
283.28 mg
* 1 serving = 4 tablets

USAGE RECOMMENDATION: Take AMINO 2700 exclusively before bed, every single day, regardless of whether you worked out or not.

Dosage depends on your body weight:

up to 165 lbs
3 tabs
from 165 to 240 lbs
4 tabs
over 240 lbs
5 tabs

If you happen to wake up in the middle of the night, taking one more tablet is fine—but I definitely don't recommend waking yourself up just to take supplements, because interrupting your sleep actually messes with your muscle recovery.

packaging / servings
USD
120 tabs / 30 days
115.00
350 tabs / 88 days
250.00

Adam Kern4 said:what I was getting at—about doing this as fast as possible before summer hits in 2010...

Look, "fastest" and "by summer 2010" just don't live in the same universe.

Instead of worrying about what to drink, you really ought to be asking what you're eating.
The drinks and protein powders? That's secondary stuff... honestly, everything starts with fixing your entire diet first.
Go check out www.bodybuilding.com/forum/ but please, do your homework first so you don't end up being one of those guys who tries to fake a physique overnight—there are tons of "instant summer body" lifters out there who are basically just wasting their time.
It’s the same deal with the steroid crowd who try to bulk up instantly and just end up looking like bloated water balloons.
Building real muscle is a long game...

KPMG keeps popping up every single time I click around the site
Basically, it’s blocking that ad under the marketing section on the right side
What is even going on here? Seriously, what gives? 🙂
Look, I’ve got KPMG set to max protection against every virus and piece of internet trash out there, but it looks like it’s treating a random ad on Reddit like a total phishing site designed to steal data—which, by my definition, fits the bill perfectly 🤷 I can’t even tell which ad it is because KPMG just nukes it before I can see it

Edward Parker2 said:So, I figured I'd jump in here and ask a few things—and thanks in advance for the help!

Just to give you the rundown, my rig is pretty old now, maybe 5 years or so.
AMD Athlon XP 2600
1.91 GHz, and just 512MB RAM
ATI Radeon 9550, motherboard: Gigabyte GA-7N400l-L

Since we can get free licenses through MSDNAA E-Academy at college—which basically means getting Windows 7 for nothing—I thought to myself, why not give it a shot? So, while I wait for the guys at school to send over the info, I'm just browsing and asking around about Windows 7...
Basically, I wanna know if Windows 7 can even run on 512MB of RAM, or if I should just go ahead and buy some more right now.

Man, that's practically gospel. 🙂 512 MB is absolutely nothing.

Here is what the official word says regarding the ATI Radeon X1650 and the ATI Radeon 9550:
Note: AMD’s DirectX 9 ATI Radeon graphics accelerators are not officially supported under Windows 7. If the user chooses to, they can install the ATI Catalyst Windows Vista graphics driver under Windows 7. Please be aware that none of the new Windows 7 graphics driver (WDDM 1.1) features are supported (as the Windows Vista level graphics driver is limited to WDDM 1.0 level support). Using the ATI Catalyst Windows Vista driver under Windows 7 is not officially supported by AMD, and as such AMD will not provide any form of customer support for users running in this configuration

Your motherboard doesn't support it either.
Is it even worth trying to upgrade this thing right now?

Honestly, you're better off just picking up a new build (something with an i5, DDR3, etc.). Personally, I'm gonna hold out until the beginning of the year—maybe components will drop in price once everything settles down with Windows 7.

So, looks like installing Windows 7 is a total bust. My ATI Radeon X1650 doesn't actually have dedicated drivers for Windows 7—I mean, they technically have some, but they're just the ones meant for Windows Vista, and the manufacturer explicitly says they don't guarantee they'll even work properly.
On top of that, my motherboard isn't playing nice with it either,
so unless I pull the trigger on a whole new build next year, this rig is just gonna have to wait.
Honestly, I really don't feel like dealing with the massive headache of backing up all my data and nuking my current Windows Vista setup just to find out half my drivers and programs are going to glitch out anyway.

Quick question for you guys. I just grabbed a copy of Windows 7 Ultimate Retail (Final) 32-bit/64-bit MSDN (from back in Oct '09), and up until now, I've just been running around on a 32-bit version of Vista.
So, I decided to take a peek at my performance Information and Tools, and turns out my processor actually supports 64-bit. I’d love to jump over to Windows 7 64-bit, but here's the catch—I'm sitting on only 2 GB of RAM, and I read somewhere that you need more than 4 GB to make it work properly. My big question is, will it even run on 2 GB? I'm kind of stuck because I don't have any open slots left on my motherboard to add more RAM.

My heart really goes out to everyone here—my dad went through the exact same thing about a year and three months ago,
We tried absolutely everything you can imagine, so I won't even get into the list... But honestly, the statistics are brutal. You can try to ignore them all you want, but that doesn't change the reality of what we're facing—especially since our healthcare system can be so incredibly cold and unforgiving, not to mention the rest of it.
If you ask me, the best way to handle this is to just face the facts, know exactly where you stand, and go from there.

I don't know what to say about losing someone close to you. People say time heals, but let’s be real—it never truly heals the wound.
On top of the grief, you're often left with this bitter taste in your mouth because of how the medical system works—those doctors and nurses who just seem totally indifferent.
My personal philosophy is to take that grief from losing a loved one and try to channel it into some kind of positive energy.
Holding onto that sadness isn't healthy—it's been my observation that people who bottle up that kind of grief are actually more susceptible to things like cancer.
I also wanted to mention that when it comes to prevention, antioxidants (like lycopene and beta-carotene) play such a massive role in neutralizing free radicals, which is huge when it comes to preventing various diseases.
If there's one thing I've learned from all of this, it's that health is worth every penny—don't skimp on it, because prevention is everything.

Melissa Morgan67 said:breast cancer
p.s. so you're saying there's zero chance of surviving longer than 5 years?

Look, according to the American Cancer Society, the five-year survival rate for localized breast cancer is actually sitting at 98%. If we're talking about cases where it's spread to the chest wall or lymph nodes, that rate drops to about 80%—and even then, at least a quarter of patients with metastatic breast cancer still go on to survive five years or more.

One thing to keep in mind—though it’s tough to hear—is that survival rates for women under 40 tend to be slightly lower compared to older patients. It basically comes down to the fact that the cancer tends to be more aggressive in younger women. Generally speaking, women over 40 see about a 7% boost in survival odds compared to those under 40.

US stats here:
http://FastFreeFileHosting.com/file/...st-12-pdf.html

Stages:
http://www.breastcancer.org/symptoms...is/staging.jsp

So, if we're looking at stage three, you're looking at roughly 75 to 80 out of 100 patients surviving five years. Of course—and this is a huge "of course"—if it hasn't spread to distant organs by then, those chances drop off a cliff (check the table for details).

I used that "75" number on purpose, too—because let's be real, knowing how our healthcare system operates here, those odds can feel even slimmer.

When a mosquito bites you, you're usually left with just a tiny little bump or a small swollen spot.
But if you end up with something else, I’m betting it wasn't even a mosquito—it was probably some other little beast altogether. You know, one of those tiny little bugs that you mistake for a mosquito, but if they get a single second of feeding time on you, the swelling is absolutely massive.
I’ve had this happen to me a few times now, and honestly, there’s nothing you can do but sit there and wait for it to go down. It just won't budge... it takes forever. Sometimes there’s even a bit of blood around the bite if the thing was gnawing on you for a while longer.
And look, the more it itches, the more you scratch, and the more you scratch, the worse it gets—it's a losing battle, really.
That's why whenever I head out into nature in the evening—since that's when all those little pests tend to swarm up—I make sure to throw on some thicker shoes, no exceptions. 🙂

Sandra Morales27 said:What kind of treatment are we looking at? And what do the results usually look like?
Is there actually a chance for a full recovery?

So, I did a little digging online—and just a heads-up, I’m definitely not a doctor or an oncologist here:

For this specific type of cancer, they usually go with a lumpectomy or a segmental resection. Radiation therapy is also pretty standard. They’ll also perform a lymph node biopsy. Generally speaking, the prognosis for intracystic or intraductal papillary breast carcinoma is actually really good—we're talking survival rate approaching 100%.
That being said, you should absolutely get a professional opinion from an oncologist.

Link: http://www.ajronline.org/cgi/content...83/5/1516#REF3

Melissa Morgan67 said:What does it actually mean when cancer is at stage 3?

Phase III
Basically, for most types of cancer, being at stage III means the tumor—or maybe a few of them—has grown quite a bit and is starting to mess with the surrounding tissue. It also means the nearby lymph nodes, which carry all that immune system fluid and white blood cells, have been hit too.
The symptoms you're feeling really depend on where the tumor is located.
Generally speaking, people feel pretty wiped out during this stage because those nearby lymph nodes are involved. Plus, since the tumor is bigger, there can be some pretty intense pressure and pain.
Treatment
Usually involves chemo and/or radiation.
Since the cancer cells have often started to wander outside the immediate area, both of these treatments are used to try and kill off the cells or at least shrink the mass down.
Prognosis
The survival rate for stage III depends heavily on exactly what kind of cancer we're talking about. For instance, the five-year survival rate for stage III colon cancer is around 64 percent. For cervical cancer, the average survival rate sits at about 70 percent. Pancreatic cancer, though—that’s a tougher one—tends to have a much lower survival rate because it's so frequently caught late in stages III or IV, with a five-year survival rate of just four percent.