Clayton South - Is No2 The Real Deal?

**webmaster** · 05-07-2003, 06:44 PM

As an author in the bodybuilding industry, I believe that my readers deserve more than a review that says simply 'I liked this product, so buy it.' It is not enough for a person to 'like' a product; liking does not make the product a worthwhile purchase. Test results determine the worth of a product.

http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/south28.htm

HOW TO REVIEW: Post Your Review Of This Article - CLICK ON POST REPLY BELOW! You do NOT need to be a registered member to post a reply in this section!

PumpFe · 05-08-2003, 12:46 PM

C'mon Clayton.

This study cannot possibly enable you to draw any sound conclusions. A noble attempt, however, you should be commended for even trying.

What makes a bodybuilding guru anyway?

Stay Pumped!

ryanG · 05-10-2003, 08:34 AM

interesting article..but im on my third bottle...havent gained a pound(lost a couple actually), no strength gains....i had high hopes for this...i just think you're trying to push more units on your website

EricS · 05-10-2003, 09:38 AM

When you don't control for dietary intake, and esspecially the workout programs, you can not say that it was the supplement that was responsible for gains in lean mass.

On of the subjects in the contrl gained just as much as the supplement group.
perhaps he just did his homework when it comes to training and nutrition. But we really don't know because that was left up in the air.

Clayton South · 05-10-2003, 10:58 AM

Although I did not provide the details of each of the subjects diet, if you do look at the review you will find that the factor of diet was controlled for, along with other factors. Take another look and you will find what I am talking about.

In fact, I provide for you here the paragraph in question:

"It should be noted, however, that this is NOT in meant to be a strict scientific study, as the term science is meant. This is a real-world experiment, and within the limits of reason [and outside of the laboratory setting] each of the subjects followed a similar workout and dietary regimen. The variables present in a real-world setting are too numerous to control in their totality, and even the best designed and controlled University studies are unable, outside of the laboratory setting, to control all possible variables present in a particular setting or environment. Therefore each subject controlled the variables that were possible to control [diet, exercise regimen, sleep levels, time of day of exercise, water intake, etc]."

Hope that helps.

-Clayton South

Clayton South · 05-10-2003, 11:13 AM

Ryan,

If you are on your third bottle and you are not seeing any results, perhaps you do not respond to this particular supplement. For some people some supplements work, and for others they do not. For example, some people do not respond to creatine, while most do. Others will try thermogenics, and Hydroxycut will work well for them, but Xenadrine will do absolutley nothing.

You also should be cognisant of your dietary intake. If your calories are not sufficient, or if your protein intake or carbohydrates are not at high enough levels, you will not gain, even if you take steroids.

And, as for your contention that I wish to push more units from the website, i say this: I am a WRITER. I am not in the pocket of anyone, nor will i ever be. My integrity as a writer is derived from doing objective reporting. I will not get into the exact details, but let me tell you that my writing is in NO WAY linked to the sales of bodybuilding.com, and i prefer this. Why? Because it allows me to write what i want, when i want, and how i want. If any of those three conditions were to change, I would stop writing altogether.

I recieved an e-mail the other day asking if someone should buy NO2 or not. My response? I did not give one. Personally, it does not matter to me at all if someone does or does not buy this product. I have presented the facts as they emerged in this situation, and it is up to each of YOU to decide to either try this supplement or not. In either case I dont care what choice you make: At least now you have some information that is real.

I have, in times past, been contacted by one particular supplement manufacturer and told to "go easy" on their products [protein bars, creatine etc]. I will not name this company, but if you read my writings you can tell who I am talking about. My response to them? If they make good products then the evidence will emerge that they do. If not, then they had better shape up because I report EVERYTHING, not just the good. You can find that in this product review, too. Give it a read.

-Clayton South

**str8flexed** · 05-10-2003, 11:47 AM

Eric hopefully we can get our experiment up soon huh?

Clayton, if you are testing a supplement you cannot just test for weight or size gains... too many variebles go into such a process. There are literally millions of physiological happening for muscle growth to occur. Far to complex to test for even by controling diet. What about training? What about one's genotype? How does one person respond to X style of training? How long has this subject been training compared to this one? Is subject A an ectomorph while B is an endomorph? Not to mention thousands of other variebles... what you CAN DO to make a valid experiment is test the supplement claim. If NO2 claims to increase nitric oxid production... than one of the only viable tests would be to test for NO2 or makers of increased NO2 production (granted I don't know how to go about doing this and you'd probably need a research lab). Or if one wanted to test ALA... measuring glucose d.... (whoops i almost said too much)... sorry but I can't give away all my secrets

Layne "damn this college work... no time to write"

Clayton South · 05-10-2003, 12:41 PM

I will respond to this in an e-mail style, for ease. All quotations come from the review.

>Clayton, if you are testing a supplement you cannot just test for >weight or size gains... too many variebles go into such a >process. There are literally millions of physiological happening >for muscle growth to occur. Far to complex to test for even by >controling diet. What about training? What about one's >genotype?

As I stated in the review, this was NOT University research. I also knew that many questions begining with "what about..." would probably come forth. In the end, if the product helped someone to put on mass, genotype and other things dont really matter.
Here is what i wrote regarding such questions:

"I am quite aware that some will be able to find flaws in the review and will ask questions beginning with "well, what about..." To them I reply: Well, what about the "what about" questions? To those who would say the test was biased for a number of reasons, I ask: SO WHAT? "

>How long has this subject been training compared to this one?

Already answered in the review. Refer to each profile.

>Is subject A an ectomorph while B is an endomorph? Not to >mention thousands of other variebles... what you CAN DO to >make a valid experiment is test the supplement claim.

Already done in the review. Refer to the testable lable claims section. After all, a supplement is effective only as much as it does what it claims to do.

>If NO2 claims to increase nitric oxid production... than one of the >only viable tests would be to test for NO2 or makers of >increased NO2 production (granted I don't know how to go >about doing this and you'd probably need a research lab).

Here is something I included in the review as well.

"If one is creative enough an analysis can continue on an issue forever. Hypothetical analysis is fruitless once a question regarding the purpose of a supplements existence has been answered. This test answered that question."

The question, of course, was: "What we care about, as athletes, is the bottom line - ie. DOES SOMETHING WORK AS CLAIMED?" And, does the introduction of the supplement produce gains where its absence would not have? [hence the placebo group, as a contrast to the test group].

The answer was obvious:

"The obvious conclusion reached is that nitric oxide supplementation does prove effective for eliciting gains in lean body mass."

I don't need to explain to you that when people come across a long article or review they tend to scroll past the details to get to the conclusion. People want the bottom line. In this case, however, it is clear from the postings that a great many people did not take the time to actually READ the details. If they had, then they would have seen all that I have just posted.

This will be the last posting that of mine on this issue. I suggest that anyone who has unresolved questions, read the ENTIRE article.

- Clayton South

EricS · 05-10-2003, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Clayton South
I will respond to this in an e-mail style, for ease. All quotations come from the review.

>Clayton, if you are testing a supplement you cannot just test for >weight or size gains... too many variebles go into such a >process. There are literally millions of physiological happening >for muscle growth to occur. Far to complex to test for even by >controling diet. What about training? What about one's >genotype?

As I stated in the review, this was NOT University research. I also knew that many questions begining with "what about..." would probably come forth. In the end, if the product helped someone to put on mass, genotype and other things dont really matter.
Here is what i wrote regarding such questions:

"I am quite aware that some will be able to find flaws in the review and will ask questions beginning with "well, what about..." To them I reply: Well, what about the "what about" questions? To those who would say the test was biased for a number of reasons, I ask: SO WHAT? "

>How long has this subject been training compared to this one?

Already answered in the review. Refer to each profile.

>Is subject A an ectomorph while B is an endomorph? Not to >mention thousands of other variebles... what you CAN DO to >make a valid experiment is test the supplement claim.

Already done in the review. Refer to the testable lable claims section. After all, a supplement is effective only as much as it does what it claims to do.

>If NO2 claims to increase nitric oxid production... than one of the >only viable tests would be to test for NO2 or makers of >increased NO2 production (granted I don't know how to go >about doing this and you'd probably need a research lab).

Here is something I included in the review as well.

"If one is creative enough an analysis can continue on an issue forever. Hypothetical analysis is fruitless once a question regarding the purpose of a supplements existence has been answered. This test answered that question."

The question, of course, was: "What we care about, as athletes, is the bottom line - ie. DOES SOMETHING WORK AS CLAIMED?" And, does the introduction of the supplement produce gains where its absence would not have? [hence the placebo group, as a contrast to the test group].

The answer was obvious:

"The obvious conclusion reached is that nitric oxide supplementation does prove effective for eliciting gains in lean body mass."

I don't need to explain to you that when people come across a long article or review they tend to scroll past the details to get to the conclusion. People want the bottom line. In this case, however, it is clear from the postings that a great many people did not take the time to actually READ the details. If they had, then they would have seen all that I have just posted.

This will be the last posting that of mine on this issue. I suggest that anyone who has unresolved questions, read the ENTIRE article.

- Clayton South

The list of claims by No2 is a long one and muscle growth is only one of them. I must stress that it says muscle growth. However the majority of claim is in its ability to alter hemodynamics.

The fact of tha matter is, you did NOT test fo any of the claim listed in your review. body weight and gains in 'muscle mass' as the label claims are entierly different things.

I'm not accusing you of trying to sell the product or anything like that. I just don't see how you can conclude that this product does what it says when in all reality you didn't test for any of the claims. And if you had, as stated before, you left to many vairable un atended to say that you controlled all other factors to the point that ANY increase in body weight would be due to increase in muscle mass as a DIRECT result of NO2 supplementation.

EricS · 05-10-2003, 05:45 PM

yeah I know, layne! Its crunch time around here. Just give me till the end of next week. I should have some time to get the methods drawn up!

**str8flexed** · 05-11-2003, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by EricS
yeah I know, layne! Its crunch time around here. Just give me till the end of next week. I should have some time to get the methods drawn up!

I've got all my info together... just have to review a few more things on something called p38 MAPK

02-11-2005, 11:17 AM

in reply with clayton south is no2 the real deal. i think it is a great research study and it not being in a labratory makes it more believable.

i am curently on no2, it has been a week (too erly to tell) but i am trying to do all the right things wiel taking this product, such as protine in take carbs and days off just to name a few.
as i said it hase been a week. i tip in at 186 and am going to wiegh my self every week, ill keep you updated. i plain on taking the prduct for three months.

wheels30 · 12-23-2008, 10:43 PM

cant believe this site even posted this article...what a joke...