Filed under: blogging
The Great Mistake Good in principle. Bad in proof. That is precisely what the makers desire you to think. Nonetheless I haven’t begun to see any convincing evidence. In reality if anybody has a study supporting that concept, please post it here ( please ensure it was not financed by the maker ) because I am having a difficult time finding one.
More importantly, even though there were studies that showed an NO product ends up in more blood being brought to the muscle, does it even make a difference? If that is so how gigantic is the difference? Enough to make a case for spending $40 each month on it? Once more, I am having difficulty finding any clinical proof supporting any of these beliefs. Once more, let’s go to the hose analogy. Let us take a look at it from a gardener’s point of view. Would you prefer to water your garden with a garden hose or a fire hose? I’d hope you’d answer garden hose because you’d drown your plants with a fire hose. What NO products lack in science, they more than make up for in clever promoting strategies. The Great Con So how did I am getting results from NO-Xlpode, the best supplement ever? May I explain. Is there any stand alone NO products on the market any more that just contains arginine or one of its spinoffs? No. Now all of them contain creatine, beta alanine, BCAAs, leucine, caffeine, or another ingredient that really does work. The big majority contain at least four different ingredients. Yea, but that is for simplicity purposes.
No Comments so far
Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>