Pics of bodybuilders

I've seen so many pictures of 'before' and 'after' whereby the before pictures are of fat, lazy, ordinary-looking men, and the 'after' pictures are of clearly pro bodybuilders. Just looking through a magazine, I've seen such pictures of Lee Priest. You wouldn't know the two pictures were of the same guy. I'll use this as an example because you probably have seen them.

But he's been into bodybuilding for long enough. Surely he couldn't possibly get that fat and ordinary in between competitions? Or maybe he does, and an intense dose of weightlifting and steroids converts him in no time?

I've read articles that imply that an ordinary man can become a pro bodybuilder in the space of a year to two years. I can't believe this. How would you pack on that much muscle naturally in that length of time?

Don't believe everything you read. Especially don't believe the majority of what you read in muscle mags.

dave h

(1) They're all a pack of liars (authors of supplement adds) (2) Lee Priest has been extremely strong since junior high. He didn't get like that over night. He's a genetic freak who has trained hard over a long period. There's no way he would get completely out of shape. However, he is well known for being somewhat bigger when he's not competing. (3) No, ordinary people can't become pro bodybuilders in a few years. There are some people who are actually pretty athletic to begin with, but the muscle is hidden under some fat. So if they spend about 6 months losing fat, and enhancing their natural strength foundation, they end up looking pretty impressive. But not comparable to pro bodybuilders.

On a similar note, the 'before' pictures in weight loss/fitness advertisements usually are designed to show the people in the most unflattering light possible. The subjects are hunched over with very poor posture, have glum looks/moronic grins on their faces, poor hairstyles, and are badly dressed (e.g. the chubby woman in the too-tight bikini). The photos themselves are poorly done, on purpose of course, with bad lighting and exposures. I suppose *some* of the 'before' pictures are existing shots of the subjects, taken before they planned to start the programs, but somehow I doubt that's too common. It should go without saying that the 'after' pictures show the subjects in good poses, well dressed and groomed, and use quality photographic techniques.