November 1995
-- Hardcore Muscle and Dan Duchaine have made excerpts
of this November, 1995 interview available to readers
of Mesomorphosis. For subscription information and
copies of the full interview, please visit the
Hardcore Muscle homepage.HM:
IFG-1
Dan you seem to be standing back on this
one. Colgan thinks it will bring on the age of the
superfreak, while you have only spoken of its use
in fat reduction. We know GH never panned out as
incredible as everyone wanted it to. Do you want
to make sure it is the real deal before you give
it your stamp of approval? We keep hearing every
imaginable scenario ranging from "the stuff is fantastic"
to "didn't do anything for me." Do you have any
opinions on how it is best used? It was reported
to work a lot better with GH in a study. Do you
have any theories on how or what compounds (steroids,
anticatabolics, insulin mimickers) could be used
in a synergistic protocol for best results with
IGF?
Dan: Well Colgan really calls
it all the time, doesn't he? (laughs) Because he's
always wrong - when Twinlabs changes their mind.
Vanadyl sulfate is toxic but now that Twin is selling
it, it's not toxic any more! But anyway, enough
about Colgan. You know the thing is
I've never
seen any real IGF-1. All the stuff I've seen pictures
of and read about is the lab cell culture which
is doctored not to bind on the carrier proteins.
So it would probably be wonderful. You sent me a
couple of reports and I read some others and if
you look at the amounts they were using, it was
quite high actually. Because of a four hour half-life
they were using it twice a day, at a calculated
dosage of 18mg a day. That's a very high amount.
And these bodybuilders are taking 50 micrograms.
And I find it hard to believe that 50 micrograms
might do anything considering
God knows what they
might have stacked on top of that. Maybe I'm wrong,
but I think IGF will be terrific once it gets cheap
enough to use. And you really want it to bind on
the carrier proteins. You want it to last for the
4 hours. The cell culture stuff has a half life
of 20 minutes, you don't want that. It's as short
as growth hormone
you have to use the high amounts.
Eventually someone will offer it either out of Russia
or Australia. Of course you know, there were some
side effects such as jaw pain and weird funky stuff.
And it does work well with GH synergistically. They're
just the opposite of each other. IGF-1 would lower
your blood sugar and GH does the opposite. Together
it stabilizes it. So the worst thing you could do
is to use IGF-1 and insulin at the same time, you
would conk out. I think it has a lot of potential.
The only problem with all that stuff
if you remember
back to the geriatrics using GH, when they stopped
using GH, within a few weeks all the benefits ceased.
At least when you stop steroids, it takes a year
or more for all those gains to completely disappear.
And I'm afraid for the high expense of IGF-1, that
when you go off it, I wonder how long it will last.
HM: Yeah, a couple people told us they
used it, and they said how awesome it worked and
they weren't using anything else.
Dan: Over the phone
?
HM: Yeah.
Dan: Oh, yeah you know how that goes - "I'm 190
and ripped" and you see them in real life and it's
a fat piece of shit. (We are all laughing hard.)
It's like on the Internet, everybody is big and
strong and ripped - on the computer and you meet
them in real life and they are little dorks!
HM: (Laughing) Hypothetically, if you
were going to use IGF-1, would you use it with
?
Dan: Oh yeah, steroids, GH, you would want to
use it all for a synergistic effect. But definitely
with growth hormone, all the studies say it's not
only additive
put it this way
if you could get
a ½ pound gain from IGF-1, and a ½ pound gain from
growth hormone - if you put them together you wouldn't
get just one pound, you would get much more, they
are synergistic with the two added together
so
yeah, go for it.
HM: Anything on the amounts of growth
hormone?
Dan: Frankly, I think, nobody has used enough
growth hormone because of the cost. The only guy
I know of, the rumors were that (top WBF guy) was
using like 12 IU's of GH a day. Every day. I don't
know if that's true but that is pretty close to
what someone should be using, for best results I
would think. In the PDR, it's pretty cut and dry
in what you should be using. The Genetech is not
as efficient as the Lilly. It's microgram per kilogram
- you can figure it out. It seems that a lot of
bodybuilders are going low in dosage. In the early
80's it was worse, the recommended dosage was 2
IU's a week at $90 bucks a pop - like 2 IU's would
even do anything. And people were wondering why
it didn't work
HM: Yeah, you might as well pound down
some arginine. (joke)
Dan: I know the stunted growth children were
taking it 3 times a week, but I don't know why only
3 times a week. Why not every day? It seems logical
to me that it should be everyday. It's just like
IGF-1 is supposed to be twice a day. And GH is even
shorter acting so who knows.
HM: Maybe 4 times a day might do some
good??!!
Dan: Yeah.
HM: Do you still feel Nolvadex can be
put to good use - even though studies show it to
decrease serum blood IGF levels in the body by 25%?
Many have theorized that it lessens the muscle gains
on a steroid cycle - do you agree?
Dan: Everyone said that even though they liked
to use Nolvadex during dieting, they always found
that during the off-season
they grew better without
it. That was interesting. It might be the IGF-1.
We somehow thought it was tied to estrogen but I
don't know why. It depends. Past a certain age
like I'm 43
if you measured my growth hormone
and IGF-1 at middle age it is not very large. Would
reducing it 25% make a major difference when it
is so low to begin with? Probably not. It depends.
As you get older, estrogen is more important to
avoid for a lot of reasons, you know
prostate
cancer, this and that. But when you're young, you
could probably avoid Nolvadex. You know so many
people have spent so much money on Nolvadex to combat
gyno that they could have easily gotten the surgery
for the same amount of money and cured the problem.
Half of the people who go through puberty usually
get some kind of gyno. They don't necessarily remember
it, but it happens. And if you had gyno as an adolescent,
you are going to get it if you use steroids - unless
you totally avoid all the things that would cause
it. And I don't know if Nolvadex will help those
kind of people. I don't know if it is a real preventative.
Close to two bucks a tab - get the surgery.
HM: How do you feel about Clomid's use
as a prevention of gyno - overrated? Could a 2 on
/ 2 off program of Clomid be something in which
gyno could be prevented in your opinion?
Dan: You know Teslac is an ideal antiestrogen
but we could never find it out of the country, and
we looked too. Clomid
inexpensive in Mexico but
very expensive here. Everyone has done quite well
with it for raising testosterone if you are young
enough with 2 tabs a day. As far as an
they never
approved it as an antiestrogen because it was more
toxic than Nolvadex. Most people who use Clomid,
they are not using it all year long. The problem
is everyone's using so much testosterone - not a
little but a lot! Back in the 80's we thought there
was some kind of precision to anabolic use but now
it is not quality but quantity
HM: Have you had a chance to look at
the other growth factors (EGF, fibroblast growth
factor, nerve growth factor, TGF, etc.)
If so,
do you feel any or all of these are interesting
on a muscle-building standpoint?
Dan: Oh sure! There has been some research that
the epidermal growth factor has been effective
but all the G.F.'s have been marketed at such a
high price that people are unable to use high dosages.
But who knows what's going to happen when prices
come down and people are on some higher dosages.
At the higher dosages, who knows what will be the
outcome.
HM: Have you heard or have any insight
on the new fat hormone drug in development?
Dan: Leptin
a few years ago we were talking
about brown fat and having the beta 3 receptors
and I believe they figured out that leptin is one
of the naturally occurring beta 3 agonists in the
body. The interesting thing about beta 3 receptors
is that there's not many in the body, you got many
more beta 2 receptors in the muscle. The beta 3's
are only in small areas. However the nice thing
about leptin is you don't need a lot and unlike
clenbuterol, you don't down regulate the receptors.
So for bodybuilding, it might be pretty good. However,
for most of the obese people who think they are
going to need it, some research has shown that they
(obese) have genetically damaged beta 3 receptors
that don't accept it. And many obese people have
very high leptin levels already. The body is trying
to compensate so it's not going to help them much.
But it will be good for athletes because - clenbuterol
is good but it only lasts 2-3 weeks at a time unless
you jack up the dosage sky-high. As I mentioned
on an audiotape a while ago, there is another thermogenic
compound that I'll probably introduce at the end
of the year. Even though I promised January 1. It
is much more thermogenic than clenbuterol and doesn't
even involve those receptors at all. It is much
better and cheaper. More dangerous though because
if you take too much you don't get sick
you die!
Because you raise your body temp over 105 degrees
and your cooked brain turns into poached eggs. So
I have been hesitant introducing it or writing about
it without some safeguards.
HM: To be blatantly honest with you,
Dan, we have seen you come full circle on your diet
theories. In your first book you recommended eating
a lot and often. Now it seems you are approaching
a nutrient density theory on diet. Low calories
- high nutrients. Correct us if we are wrong. Even
though nutrient density looks good on paper and
looks like it will build the muscle desired, how
come the guys (natural and unnatural) who really
push the calories, really seem to be the ones putting
on the greatest amount of muscle (and of course,
extra bodyfat too)? i.e.
Yates, Sombaty versus
Ray, Wheeler, etc.
Do you feel there is any possibility
that the body can speed up with a more efficient
anabolic effect with abundant calories - just as
the metabolism slows down somewhat at deprivation
of food? Couldn't the body adapt somewhat to a tremendous
muscle building overload effect with food if a huge
amount of demand (brutal workouts) is there?
Dan: Well
I don't think Yates and Sombaty get
that fat actually. I must admit when I started out
I wasn't the smartest guy in the world back then.
I just had a knack with the words back in the early
80's. And I'm sure we were wrong on a lot of things.
The thing is
there are a few individuals that
can get up to 15-20% bodyfat, put on a lot of muscle
and then be able to take it off. I have no problem
getting that fat in off-season if they can prove
to me they can get in shape. Obviously, like Rory
Leidermeyer, he never got it right - he always fucked
up. And most people who get that fat (15-20%) have
trouble getting back down and even if they do, their
vascularity and skin taughtness suffers.
HM: Do you feel it is a compromise though,
not taking in enough food, with trying to maximize
muscle mass?
Dan: You should always eat as much food as you
can, but I think some people should spend the thirty
bucks on calipers and keep the threshold of bodyfat
at 12% or lower. Fifteen percent of bodyfat with
a guy with a lot of muscle
he looks pretty fat.
That's a bodybuilder who really is a powerlifter
with a gut. Twelve percent isn't too sloppy and
you can come down and up in bodyweight with some
ease. But there are some people that can pull it
off, but rarely have seen anyone going into a contest
not fuck up on the way down.
HM: If you could pull it off, and eat
a lot more food in the off-season, do you feel that
you could gain more mass like that?
Dan: Sure, sure, but the secret is to keep it
when you diet it off. First of let me say this.
People lie. Vic Richards does not eat 15,000 calories.
The guy pretty much can't count, he's so stupid.
The guy wouldn't be able to count up the boxes with
a calculator if the boxes were in front of him so
I doubt 15,000. Very few people can hit 7,000. Strydom
hit 7,000 but he had a lot of support to do that.
People think if you eat so many calories you must
be hotter. That's not true. An inch of fat all around
the body will keep the heat in. If you have thin
skin you are radiating heat out into the room so
you can get away with taking in more calories.
HM: But let's say you have two twins.
One of the twins says I'm going to get as big as
I can while the other twin wants to build muscle
but keep lean. Do you think that the guy who is
taking in the gross amount of calories to build
big time muscle (when they measure him in a water
tank) will have a lot more muscle than the twin
who tried to keep his bodyfat to a minimum?
Dan: Yes. Yes, but when they both come down to
6% bodyfat it will be very close because of the
dieting. I think the high calorie guy will have
a slight advantage in muscle mass but what is his
skin and vascularity going to be like? But I must
tell you, most bodybuilders I know eat more than
3,000 unless they lie around all day. Even I eat
close to 3,000 but I
well I ride my bike quite
a bit now. Most of those pros, of course, hold water
but a lot of that fat is held under their abdominal
wall in their viscera. That's not increase size
of the gut from GH but a combination of high carbs,
high insulin and high testosterone. All that fat
in there is very sensitive to androgens especially
DHT.
HM: Do you think they can ever get rid
of that? The visceral fat?
Dan: They would lose a lot of muscle. Visceral
fat is like the last fat to come off the body. Back
in the old days when they weren't using a lot of
androgens, you didn't have that. But now with everyone
using so much testosterone, that gut is all over
the place now. Pros, amateurs
you know.
HM: Wouldn't clenbuterol be at its most
useful in these high density / calorie diets? Have
you ever experimented with a clen / volume food
intake protocol?
Dan: That's kind of like pointless, because many
of these top pros use clen all year round unless
they run out of it. And they are using 10-15 tablets
a day. The problem is that it works 2 weeks and
that's it. If you cycle it 2 weeks on and then three
weeks off then
yeah it could work well. You could
be precise about it but you'll never do it. (Dan
was speaking of the thermometer method each morning
as he has described in past articles.) It's so nice
to eat so much shit on clen that people just don't
get off it.
***
HM: You have spoken of a high fat diet.
Is this different somewhat than DiPasquales'? If
so, what are your basic recommendations?
Dan: First off, high fat diets have been around
for quite awhile. I mean before Zumpano, there was
the Atkins diet which was mostly low carbs all the
time, which is not the healthiest thing in the world.
Especially for athletes because it is too catabolic,
over time. Both DiPasquales' and mine are based
on the 7 day (5 on, 2 off) plan. I'm a little more
precise. He doesn't care to get into ketosis, blood
sugar, ketones in the urine and I do. Ketones are
fractured fats and they are not as efficient as
regular fats so you need more grams for the energy.
Of course, it is a nice diet that he has done because
it is just a rip-off of our stuff from the early
80's.
HM: He seems really vague about it.
Dan: The problem is I used that diet for a long
time in the early 80's and most of the guys in prison
were on it. You have to really do it yourself. He
doesn't seem to have a lot of people on a one-to-one
basis to really get the feedback. I doubt he has
done it himself for a prolonged amount of time.
He's armchair about it. People rebel against it
and don't want to follow it. But you have to expect
that.
HM: On your 33/33/33 diet are there any
important do's and don'ts? Do you feel that the
above diet is more beneficial dieting or can it
be used ideally for muscle building too?
Dan: About 25% of the people in the U.S. wouldn't
need that diet. They have really great insulin sensitivity.
These people process carbs well and don't give a
shit about aerobics and that would be fine. There
are another 25% that are quite lousy at processing
carbs like myself. And then there are about 50%
that are somewhere in the middle. There is no such
thing as an essential carbohydrate. There are essential
amino acids, essential minerals / vitamins. There
are essential fatty acids. There is no such thing
as essential carbs. Protein can be turned into fat.
Protein can turn into glucose. Past a certain point
on many people, much of the protein and carbs that
you eat are turned into fat right in the body -
right in the liver and you have no control over
it - and it is only one kind of fat. Saturated fat.
Saturated fat really lowers insulin sensitivity.
So if you just accept that your body is going to
have some kind of fat in there, it is better to
control it yourself than let the body do it.
***
HM: I have heard of some people still
trying to crush up those Anadrol tablets and inject
them.
Dan: Yeah, I remember one 50 mg shot injected
seemed to feel like 3 orals. Hey, have you guys
seen some of these guys with the instant calves?
I talked to Nadler about that because some of these
guys are way too poor for implants. I asked, could
you do collagen there and he said, "Yeah, but it's
250 dollars a cc." But you can easily inject saline
water in the muscle and it will swell up for a few
days. You could do that for calves for a contest
and it's a lot cheaper than Esiclene. It would swell
up much better.
HM: Some people get nerve damage from
Dan: Well, Nadler showed me step-by-step instructions
on how to put silicone in your calves. Just long
small amounts in your calves, not large amounts,
and your muscle will encapsulate it. And you can
keep building it up and building it up. You could
do biceps too.
HM: How do you put the silicone in though?
Dan: A needle, but of course it is not legal
to do it in this country. But you could easily do
it in Tijuana.
HM: Could be dangerous with the silicone
though - like it is with breast implants.
Dan: That's a little different; you're only using
small amounts. When they originally did silicone
in the 70's before they put it in the sac, they
put a massive amount in the gland. But if you used
a small amount and let the body encapsulate it,
you could do it. I would do it.
HM: Will it move with the muscle though?
Dan: Yes it will. That's the nice thing about
it. Nadler can't do it in this country but I could
ask him - if he went to Tijuana, would he do it
there? You would have to go back and forth because
you couldn't do it all at once.
HM: Could someone do it themselves?
Dan: (Dan got a good chuckle out of that one.)
I could probably do it. I have no fear of needles.
I'll ask him.
Copyright
© 1995 Dan Duchaine and Hardcore Muscle International.
Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
|