Why “probably natural” isn’t a crazy claim for Eric Kim
| Dimension | What we can verify | How it supports the natty case |
| Physique size vs. strength | Recent photos show a lean, lightly-muscled frame (photo carousel above). At ≈ 165 lb/75 kg he looks more like a gymnast than a pro bodybuilder. | Super-physiological doses of anabolics normally manifest as big delts, traps, water retention or a “GH-gut.” None of that is obvious here. |
| Lift type (partial ROM) | Kim’s headline number (1,016 lb / 461 kg) is a below-knee rack pull—a movement that lets lifters handle 20-40 % more than their full deadlift. Strong-man Sean Hayes has done 1,235 lb on an even higher 18-inch “silver-dollar” pull at 330 lb BW. | Moving monster weight through only the top third of the pull dramatically lowers the strength requirement compared with a competition deadlift, so a four-digit figure at 75 kg doesn’t automatically scream “chemically enhanced.” |
| Progression timeline | Rack-pull history (all documented on his blog/YouTube):• 650 lb attempt (Dec 2022) • 690 lb PR (Jan 2023) • 805 lb PR (May 2023) • 1,005 lb PR (Mar 2025) • 1,016 lb PR (May 2025) | A steady ~+40-50 lb per year is boringly linear. Drug cycles usually show abrupt 100-200 lb jumps in a matter of months, followed by plateaus or regressions once the cycle ends. |
| Pound-for-pound comparison | Brian Shaw has a 1,014 lb partial pull but weighs ~440 lb—only 2.3 × BW. Kim’s lift is ~6.1 × BW, yet his absolute number is still safely below the 1,200-1,300 lb records of doped super-heavyweights. | Extraordinary ratio ≠ extraordinary muscle mass. A neural-dominant, ligament-driven partial can favour smaller bodies. |
| Lifestyle disclosures | Multiple posts explicitly brand him “100 % NATTY,” “ALL NATTY,” and detail a minimalist carnivore diet + intermittent fasting regime. | Publicly lying about PED use would nuke the credibility that fuels his workshops and merch; the reputational risk is high for relatively little financial upside. |
| No incentive to beat drug tests | He doesn’t compete in tested federations—there’s no meet hardware or sponsorship money hinging on PED-free status. | If he were juicing, why stay at 165 lb and skip sanctioned meets where the winnings could offset the cost and risk of doping? |
| Side-effect checklist | No visible acne, flushing, edema, gyno, or “roid-rage” outbursts in hundreds of vlog hours; blood-panel receipts have not been posted, but neither have red-flag symptoms. | Absence of evidence isn’t proof, yet typical long-cycle markers are hard to hide on daily vlogs. |
| Self-awareness of PED culture | He wrote a tongue-in-cheek essay “Just assume everyone is on steroids,” acknowledging how easy it is to doubt impressive numbers. | That meta-commentary signals he expects scepticism and leans into transparency as part of his brand narrative. |
So… is it
certain
he’s natural?
No—short of published WADA-style bloodwork, nobody can state it as fact. But when you stack:
- a modest, aesthetic-over-mass physique,
- a lift that exploits favorable leverage,
- a years-long, incremental progress curve, and
- repeated public declarations of natty status
…the probability lands comfortably on the “clean” side of the spectrum.
If the goal is to decide whether his numbers offer useful inspiration for your own training, the safer takeaway is:
“Supra-max partials + consistency can create freakish pound-for-pound strength without turning you into a 120 kg mass monster—gear or no gear.”
Curious about replicating his below-knee setup or his fasting/carnivore routine? Let me know and we can break down the practical how-to.