When do anabolics become an rational option?

PreMier · 12-24-2003, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mudge
I'm glad you are up on the latest fictional stories. Its no wonder the feds want to outlaw prohormones, I'm betting they think just like you do.

What are these risks you speak of? Is this to say that 18 year olds are incredibly unhealthy because of all this "massive" testosterone in thier systems?

I'd like to hear your medical theories that apparently I haven't heard of.

Exactly.

I know a few people who have taken "juice" and they are big enough that they dont give a shit what people think. I have also seen people get "roid rage" but I can tell you 1 thing right now. That was their attitude to begin with. So "roid rage" isnt a total myth, but it is caused by the persons attitude and not the "juice".

Thats my opinion anyways.

**Mudge** · 12-24-2003, 05:35 PM

The only "reliable" stories of roid rage I can think of are from:

* High doses of fina
* Cheque drops (probably #1)
* Halotestin (probably #2)

oaktownboy · 12-24-2003, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MeatheadSam
Heck, the roid rage might land you in jail or put you at the wrong end of a gun.

u only believe what the media tells you huh?

MeatheadSam · 12-24-2003, 06:10 PM

An exerpt from an article in Medscape. An online physicians reference widely utilized by internists and other medical professionals....

This hardly makes them out to be harmless and at the very least risky if used for extended periods. Some of this is over my head but I do understand most of it. But it is a personal call, if you think the risk is worth it then you are the one who will have to live with the possibilities of health problems.

The exerpt:

Side Effects of Anabolic-Androgenic Steroid Hormones
The adverse effects of any drug must be considered from the viewpoint of short- and long-term effects. Most of the studies of the anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones were of short duration, from 8 to 16 weeks. Meanwhile, a large number of people have been taking these medications -- often obtained through the illicit drug market -- for many years, but there are no studies of the long-term effects. From an epidemiologic viewpoint, the anabolic-androgenic steroids do not appear, at this point, to have the same potential for causing death or disability that cigarette smoking, cocaine use, or chronic alcohol abuse has. Nevertheless, anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones have well-recognized side effects.

Transient Hepatotoxic Effects
The oral preparations of the anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones are the most hepatotoxic of this class of drugs.
Peliosis hepatis is the most serious hepatic complication. It is characterized by the development of blood-filled cysts in the liver and sometimes in the spleen. These cysts are not associated with evidence of hepatic dysfunction but have caused liver failure. Often, the first indication of peliosis hepatis is the occurrence of liver failure or life-threatening intra-abdominal hemorrhage. The 5-year incidence of peliosis hepatis has ranged as high as 17%. However, with discontinuance of the drug, the condition spontaneously resolves.

Benign, androgen-dependent adenomas of the liver may also develop with prolonged use. Hepatocellular carcinoma has been reported but is rare. Cholestatic hepatitis and jaundice have occurred with the oral anabolic steroid hormones, including the synthetic derivatives of testosterone-methyltestosterone and fluoxymesterone.

Transient Lipid Effects
Even with small doses of the oral anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones, the serum levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and, particularly, the lipoprotein A1 fraction will be decreased. This effect may be a consequence of an increase in the activity of hepatic triglyceride lipase, which leads to a decrease in the HDL cholesterol level. At times, the change in the HDL cholesterol level is marked and, theoretically, could hasten the development of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

Cardiomyopathy
Data obtained in animals and case reports in the literature have indicated that the anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones could be causally linked to an increase in the risk of dilated cardiomyopathy. Dilated cardiomyopathy may also be caused by long-term use of alcohol. The effects of the anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones and alcohol may be additive or even synergistic.

Increased Risk of Heart Attack/Stroke
The anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones may increase platelet aggregation. Also, vasospasm may occur, and the 2 factors combined may cause thrombosis. Thrombosis may also occur with the use of either testosterone or the anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones.

Transient Testicular Effects
With administration of the anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones, testosterone synthesis by the testes is reduced. However, no major alterations in the morphology of spermatozoa have been reported.

Virilization
If given to women in high enough doses for a long enough period, the anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones cause virilization.

Gynecomastia
Fibrocystic masses, usually immediately deep to the nipple, may develop in men and adolescent boys who take anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones. These lesions impart to the male breast an appearance similar to that of Tanner stage 2 or early stage 3 breast development in the adolescent girl. The lesions are painful. They may not resolve with discontinuation of the drug and may have to be removed surgically.

Premature Closure of the Epiphyses
In adolescents, there is the probability of premature closure of the epiphyses with prolonged use of high-dose anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones, resulting in a shorter stature than would have been attained if there had not been interference with natural growth.

Needle Sharing
In adolescents, needle sharing has been observed in association with the use of injectable anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones.

Psychological Effects
A small percentage of users of high-dose anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones appear to exhibit clinically significant psychological signs and symptoms, including highly aggressive behavior ("roid rage"), psychoses, and depression. Equally important, perhaps, is the fact that people who take anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones for an extended period become psychologically dependent on the drugs. Whether this is a result of liking their drug-induced appearance or of an action on the brain is not known.

Less Relevant Side Effects
Hyperinsulinemia and altered glucose tolerance have been reported with the use of the oral anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones, but diabetes mellitus does not develop.
Increases in blood pressure have been reported in several studies, but the magnitude of the increases has not been clinically significant.

MeatheadSam · 12-24-2003, 06:22 PM

Of specific concern in a young steriod user, say an 18 -21 or younger, the premature closure of the Epiphyses or growth plates will result in being smaller than naturally possible.

MeatheadSam · 12-24-2003, 06:34 PM

Don't get me wrong fella's. Pop all the pills you want. Inject until you look like a human pin cushion. It will not affect me in any way.

I just feel compelled to try and give some sound advice about something I feel is more risky than the general musclehead will admit.

In fact, I would hope the studies are wrong and everything is harmless. This would mean none of my friends here on IM will be at risk if they use them. But I don't beleive they are harmless.

here is another helpful link http://espn.go.com/special/s/drugsan.../steroids.html

**Mudge** · 12-25-2003, 12:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MeatheadSam
From an epidemiologic viewpoint, the anabolic-androgenic steroids do not appear, at this point, to have the same potential for causing death or disability that cigarette smoking, cocaine use, or chronic alcohol abuse has. Nevertheless, anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones have well-recognized side effects.

A woman on Anadrol for 6 years in a row at 300mg a day is not long term? Interesting viewpoint.

**Mudge** · 12-25-2003, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MeatheadSam
In fact, I would hope the studies are wrong and everything is harmless. This would mean none of my friends here on IM will be at risk if they use them. But I don't beleive they are harmless.

Studies are to be taken with a grain of salt my friend, one study will refute what another claims is fact or observed truth. Science is wrong on a regular basis until someone unbiased comes along or finds better methods for observation or interpretation of data, like the 4 minute mile being impossible.

bandaidwoman · 12-25-2003, 05:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mudge
Studies are to be taken with a grain of salt my friend, one study will refute what another claims is fact or observed truth. Science is wrong on a regular basis until someone unbiased comes along or finds better methods for observation or interpretation of data, like the 4 minute mile being impossible.

It's not that science is wrong on a regular basis, it's that the scientific community constantly challenges its own conclusions on a regular basis. A feature that is unique to scientific inquiry that is extraordinary but makes science in the eyes of the public, so fallacious.

Nowhere is this more true than the field of human physiology and biology. As for finding an unbiased reasearcher, I would probably look at the safety claims of these anabolic supplements being marketed by marketers who have a vested interest in pushing what they sell. Most medical researchers and medical epidimiologists, as a whole, do not get any subsidies from the conclusions they draw when they study the effects of these supplements. (many get their funding from the NIH, National Institute of Medicine.)

My take on the whole thing.... like any other powerful drug, you cannot expect everything for nothing, there is a price to be paid for using a drug that can reap powerful rewards, unfortunately, it cannot be monitered in a controlled seitting like some other prescription drugs.

**Mudge** · 12-25-2003, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by bandaidwoman
My take on the whole thing.... like any other powerful drug, you cannot expect everything for nothing, there is a price to be paid for using a drug that can reap powerful rewards, unfortunately, it cannot be monitered in a controlled seitting like some other prescription drugs.

Blood tests are up to the invidividual user. As for dangers, they primarily come with those who abuse, you aren't going to shrivel up and die from short term use.

If this were a problem the pros would be dropping like flies, and yet the thing that kills them is diuretics.

bandaidwoman · 12-25-2003, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mudge
Blood tests are up to the invidividual user. As for dangers, they primarily come with those who abuse, you aren't going to shrivel up and die from short term use.

If this were a problem the pros would be dropping like flies, and yet the thing that kills them is diuretics.

Let's look at doping in pro bicycling. It kills, but its still rampant. The price of winning and fame supersedes any safety concerns. This is a naive conclusion.

Also, what is short term usage. Because there are no formal clinical trials, so deaths are not being reported. These young guys having heart attacks and strokes at a young age...are they telling their docs they are taking roids? No.

We can look at its counterpart, hormone replacement therapy in women in the famous Womens Health Initiative Study. After only five years, studying hundreds and thousands of women, the study was stopped in the combined estrogen progesteron arm due to the higher incidence of strokes and heart attacks incurred by the women on Hormone replacement therapy versus those who weren't.. Five years is not a long time, and this is just for hormones being used to replace deficiency, not for over replacement.

Besides, most of the complications such as brain tumors, liver problems, accelerated arthresclerosis, etc. are not immediate complications of anabolic steroid use but complications that can occur years after stopping its use.
If you are an athlete making it big here and now, who gives a shit.

**Mudge** · 12-25-2003, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bandaidwoman
These young guys having heart attacks and strokes at a young age...are they telling their docs they are taking roids? No.

Everyone we know of who has died in the community, has died from painkiller addiction, or a mixture (cocktails) of recreational drugs, or insulin.

I am not making excuses for profesional athletes, they are on completely another level of use and abuse than someone like myself, there is NO comparison at all. I wont touch diuretics, and there are many other compounds that I refuse to touch at all - even if it wont kill me, things that are attributed to drying out the joints or degenerating connective tissue I have zero interest in using. Insulin I likewise have no need for using, hGH no use and expensive, the list is a mile and a half long of things I wont mess with, how many years in a row I will never use things, etc

**Mudge** · 12-25-2003, 02:35 PM

bandaidwoman · 12-25-2003, 04:13 PM

You confuse the media with scientific experts.

True medical clincians will tell you there is no data that exxonerates or completely implicate the anabolic steroids in doing what they do. The best way to do that is to conduct a randomized , double blinded placebo controlled clinical trial, much like whats been done with estrogen hormones. None have been done to determine the long term effectsof anabolic steroids. So both parties can argue till they are blue, but to ignore the potential for harm is sticking your head in the sand.

As for the studies above they are laughable. I will dissect the one regarding the heart. I never trust anyone to interpret scientific data for me, that's why the media always screws up.

Regarding the study done at Prince Alfred Hospital in Australia. First of all, how long was their follow up in terms of coming to their conclusions that there were no significant changes in arterial structure or cardiac abnormalities.? Did they do cardiac catherizations, echocardiograms serially for just 6 months, 12 months, five years or up to ten years? (Remmber, if we suspect long term side effects this is important.) For instance, if you conducted a study on cholesterol drugs and followed people out for only six months you can conclude they confer absolutely no benefit (they don't show benefit until usually after 6 months). In addition, what was their study size, 12 people, 100 or thousands. There may be an error in clinical research called sample size error.

Then there is the crap about the MRFIT study.

The opposite holds true for women. As we age, our HDL decrease and LDL increase in direct correlation with our decrease in production of our endogenous estrogen. However, when we artificially replace it (as shown in the well designed Women's Health Initiative invovling hundreds and thousands of women and in a randomized,. double blinded, placebo controlled manner so doctors and patients were not biased) , the opposite occured. Contrary to medical opiniion, hormone replacement increased the heart attack and stroke risk. There needs to be a similar Men's Health Initiative trial to determine if exogenous testosterone replacement will protect against heart disease.

In addition, Another study only studied 22 men for only a year and measured their cholesterol after testosterone enanthate supplementation. How this translated to lowering cardiac risk is ludicrous. It lowered LDL and did not change HDL but now with knowledge of subfractions of LDL and HDL (DO google on VAP) how do we know the subfractions were not shifted in a more unfavorable manner?

I can keep going. The next study looked at twelve body builders (University Of North Texas) etc. etc

The sample sizes were small, they only followed them for a year. They only looked at cholesterol numbers. All it says that testosterone may affect cholesterol numbers in a favorable manner, wether that correlates with clincical protection (once again depending on the subfractions of HDL either HDL1 or HDL2, LDLA, LDLB etc.) is a whole different ball game.

MeatheadSam · 12-25-2003, 04:28 PM

I will just excuse myself from this debate and hire bandaidwoman to keep at it for me.

But my main concern was to convey a need to be very careful and get medical consultation. And of course not to overdose any substance.

Naturally if one has decided to use a substance then nothing will stop them. They have already decided the risks mean nothing. Any argument of the risks results in a state of denial of those risks based on poorly done studies designed to promote the use of the substance.

Also, just a hypothetical situation here but lets say drug manufacturer A decides it needs "good" feedback to help its product sales.

It is easy to get. You hire a non biased organization such as a university and fund them to do research which will benefit the education program. You define the limits of the study within boudaries which will almost assuredly produce an end result which will not be negative, ie, short term study or too few participants. Shazam! You will have a peice of "good" press to make the product seem benign to an uninformed victim.

**Mudge** · 12-25-2003, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bandaidwoman
None have been done to determine the long term effectsof anabolic steroids. So both parties can argue till they are blue, but to ignore the potential for harm is sticking your head in the sand.

I have already mentioned the woman who was on anadrol for 6 years straight using 3-6 times more than most bodybuilders have used. I have also already posted other data on anadrol:

http://medibolics.com/german2.htm

Quote:

A new study shows that one of the most powerful oral anabolic steroids improves lean muscle mass with no significant side-effects in HIV-positive men and women. (1) Oxymetholone, formerly sold in the US as Anadrol-50, was given for thirty weeks at a 150 mg/daily dose.

................

While oxymetholone is considered to be a harsh steroid with a high potential for side-effects, the subjects were reported to have no significant problems with liver function, water retention, virilization, and several side-effects thought to be associated with its use, at a dose that is three times what many bodybuilders would use, for considerably longer than they would generally use it.

Now as for the woman, who had a pre-existing liver issue, these wonderfully stupid doctors discovered after this treatment that she had lesions all over the body of the liver after this. Most people use 50-100mg a day for 4-6 weeks, not years, and not 300mg. There are very large people who probably weighed an easy 2-2.5x what this woman did, who use 300mg a day for a couple months at a time.

oaktownboy · 12-25-2003, 04:51 PM

u know why this thread is comical...? we got a member arguing the studies don't mean crap, and she probably doesn't take anything yet she is arguing against bb who actually do and know the results and the overblown "roid rage" and shit like that////

MeatheadSam · 12-25-2003, 04:58 PM

or she is just too smart to use something that couild cause her harm...

Shoot up everyone, the juice is on me tonight!

It is no wonder there is huge debate as to whether body bulding is actually a sport or even has merit as an athletic activity.

bandaidwoman · 12-25-2003, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mudge
I have already mentioned the woman who was on anadrol for 6 years straight using 3-6 times more than most bodybuilders have used. I have also already posted other data on anadrol:

http://medibolics.com/german2.htm

Now as for the woman, who had a pre-existing liver issue, these wonderfully stupid doctors discovered after this treatment that she had lesions all over the body of the liver after this. Most people use 50-100mg a day for 4-6 weeks, not years, and not 300mg. There are very large people who probably weighed an easy 2-2.5x what this woman did, who use 300mg a day for a couple months at a time.

They studied one woman, HIV positive for thirty weeks. No long term studies will be ongoing for her if she already has AIDS cachexia. Yeah, in my books that makes for great long term study.

The cholesterol drugs that can cause liver damage must be used on 1-2 years before they were found to cause liver problems in people in large, large trials.

I don't need to try cocaine or meth to know the effects it has. Just because I don't use it, doesn't mean shit. I tear apart the measly handful of bogus studies to show that in clinical medicine, the answer is not that simple and nobody on this forum can claim droids do more benefit than harm since there is absolutely no data either way.

prolangtum · 12-25-2003, 05:15 PM

No one is saying they are side effect free, but the sides like liver hepatoxicity and roid rage are overblown.

bandaidwoman · 12-25-2003, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by prolangtum
No one is saying they are side effect free, but the sides like liver hepatoxicity and roid rage are overblown.

Not overblown, but over simplified.

You are right about the roid rages. Even the psychiatrists concede that there usually is an underlying personality disorder that predisposes someone to the psychiaric complications of steroids. Unfortunately, no doctor is screening them for these disorders before placing them on steroids. Much the same way a person with manic depressive disorder cannnot be put on certain antidepressants willy nilly since they can flip into mania.

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/408595_5

Quote:

Several reports of mental status changes associated with AASs have been published. These include acute paranoia,[32] delirium,[33] mania or hypomania,[34,35] and homicidal rage.[36,37] Studies comparing AAS users to nonusing weight lifter controls have found significantly more episodes of depression, anxiety, hostility, paranoia, and aggression in users of AAS.[38, 39] One study comparing AAS users on vs off AASs reported a higher rate of aggressive feelings, verbal aggression, and aggression toward objects, but not physical aggression toward people, while on the agents. AAS users have also been observed to have a significantly greater rate of personality psychopathology compared with community controls.[40,41] As none of these studies are randomized, causality is difficult to establish in the association of AASs and psychiatric changes, including aggression and hypomania.
At least 5 studies have administered supraphysiologic doses of testosterone in a placebo-controlled design to psychiatrically "normal" subjects.[42-46] Overall, these studies indicate that the majority of normal individuals will not experience psychiatric changes with testosterone doses up to 500-600 mg/week. However, this response is not uniform and individual patients will experience marked affective changes, particularly as the dose increases beyond 500 mg/week. Furthermore, the majority of real-world AAS abusers will use doses greater than the equivalent of 500 mg of testosterone. Patients with underlying psychopathology (eg, antisocial personality disorder) or a general predisposition toward anger are probably more likely to experience an increase in angry or aggressive behavior. This relationship is important because these individuals are probably more likely to use anabolic steroids illicitly, compared with "healthy, psychologically normal men."

The potential for addiction to the AASs has been investigated. In interviews with 49 AAS users, at least 1 DSM-III-R symptom of dependence was reported by 94% of the sample, while 3 or more symptoms were reported by 57% of the sample.[47] The authors concluded that AASs were addictive and suggested that dissatisfaction with body size and increases in size and strength obtained with AASs may lead to patterns of dependent use.

As for liver problems being overblown.... that is still to be proven either way, once again, no good data to show its effects are that much safer or more dangerous than we think.

By the way, peliosis hepatitis, a liver condition of blood filled cysts that can rupture and cause internal hemmorage is almost exclusively associated with oral steroid use and maybe one or two chemotherapy agents. Thus, though not a common condition, it is a devastating condition that can be easily prevented by avoiding the most common precipitating agent.

**Mudge** · 12-25-2003, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bandaidwoman
As for liver problems being overblown.... that is still to be proven either way, once again, no good data to show its effects are that much safer or more dangerous than we think.

We know that the liver bounces back, and we have had people taking 300mg anadrol and 100mg dbol together daily, and tested within normal a month after cessation.

I can point to two people who have taken blood tests after "crazy" oral stacks like this, along with of course injectables.

bandaidwoman · 12-25-2003, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mudge
We know that the liver bounces back, and we have had people taking 300mg anadrol and 100mg dbol together daily, and tested within normal a month after cessation.

I can point to two people who have taken blood tests after "crazy" oral stacks like this, along with of course injectables.

Transient hepatic toxicity is not what concerns me. You are right about the liver being a relatively hardy organ. The most dangerous drug on the liver isn't steroids, it's tylenol. Ask any tranplant surgeon what's the top two reason why he transplants a liver and it is chronic active hepatis C and tylenol...not steroids. However, I would not place too much trust in normal liver enzymes since people with cirrosis can also have sto

12-24-2003, 06:10 PM	#34
MeatheadSam Member Elite Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Earth Posts: 169	An exerpt from an article in Medscape. An online physicians reference widely utilized by internists and other medical professionals.... This hardly makes them out to be harmless and at the very least risky if used for extended periods. Some of this is over my head but I do understand most of it. But it is a personal call, if you think the risk is worth it then you are the one who will have to live with the possibilities of health problems. The exerpt: Side Effects of Anabolic-Androgenic Steroid Hormones The adverse effects of any drug must be considered from the viewpoint of short- and long-term effects. Most of the studies of the anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones were of short duration, from 8 to 16 weeks. Meanwhile, a large number of people have been taking these medications -- often obtained through the illicit drug market -- for many years, but there are no studies of the long-term effects. From an epidemiologic viewpoint, the anabolic-androgenic steroids do not appear, at this point, to have the same potential for causing death or disability that cigarette smoking, cocaine use, or chronic alcohol abuse has. Nevertheless, anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones have well-recognized side effects. Transient Hepatotoxic Effects The oral preparations of the anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones are the most hepatotoxic of this class of drugs. Peliosis hepatis is the most serious hepatic complication. It is characterized by the development of blood-filled cysts in the liver and sometimes in the spleen. These cysts are not associated with evidence of hepatic dysfunction but have caused liver failure. Often, the first indication of peliosis hepatis is the occurrence of liver failure or life-threatening intra-abdominal hemorrhage. The 5-year incidence of peliosis hepatis has ranged as high as 17%. However, with discontinuance of the drug, the condition spontaneously resolves. Benign, androgen-dependent adenomas of the liver may also develop with prolonged use. Hepatocellular carcinoma has been reported but is rare. Cholestatic hepatitis and jaundice have occurred with the oral anabolic steroid hormones, including the synthetic derivatives of testosterone-methyltestosterone and fluoxymesterone. Transient Lipid Effects Even with small doses of the oral anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones, the serum levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and, particularly, the lipoprotein A1 fraction will be decreased. This effect may be a consequence of an increase in the activity of hepatic triglyceride lipase, which leads to a decrease in the HDL cholesterol level. At times, the change in the HDL cholesterol level is marked and, theoretically, could hasten the development of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Cardiomyopathy Data obtained in animals and case reports in the literature have indicated that the anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones could be causally linked to an increase in the risk of dilated cardiomyopathy. Dilated cardiomyopathy may also be caused by long-term use of alcohol. The effects of the anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones and alcohol may be additive or even synergistic. Increased Risk of Heart Attack/Stroke The anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones may increase platelet aggregation. Also, vasospasm may occur, and the 2 factors combined may cause thrombosis. Thrombosis may also occur with the use of either testosterone or the anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones. Transient Testicular Effects With administration of the anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones, testosterone synthesis by the testes is reduced. However, no major alterations in the morphology of spermatozoa have been reported. Virilization If given to women in high enough doses for a long enough period, the anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones cause virilization. Gynecomastia Fibrocystic masses, usually immediately deep to the nipple, may develop in men and adolescent boys who take anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones. These lesions impart to the male breast an appearance similar to that of Tanner stage 2 or early stage 3 breast development in the adolescent girl. The lesions are painful. They may not resolve with discontinuation of the drug and may have to be removed surgically. Premature Closure of the Epiphyses In adolescents, there is the probability of premature closure of the epiphyses with prolonged use of high-dose anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones, resulting in a shorter stature than would have been attained if there had not been interference with natural growth. Needle Sharing In adolescents, needle sharing has been observed in association with the use of injectable anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones. Psychological Effects A small percentage of users of high-dose anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones appear to exhibit clinically significant psychological signs and symptoms, including highly aggressive behavior ("roid rage"), psychoses, and depression. Equally important, perhaps, is the fact that people who take anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones for an extended period become psychologically dependent on the drugs. Whether this is a result of liking their drug-induced appearance or of an action on the brain is not known. Less Relevant Side Effects Hyperinsulinemia and altered glucose tolerance have been reported with the use of the oral anabolic-androgenic steroid hormones, but diabetes mellitus does not develop. Increases in blood pressure have been reported in several studies, but the magnitude of the increases has not been clinically significant.
	Just a regular guy.

12-24-2003, 06:22 PM	#35
MeatheadSam Member Elite Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Earth Posts: 169	Of specific concern in a young steriod user, say an 18 -21 or younger, the premature closure of the Epiphyses or growth plates will result in being smaller than naturally possible.
	Just a regular guy.

12-24-2003, 06:34 PM	#36
MeatheadSam Member Elite Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Earth Posts: 169	Don't get me wrong fella's. Pop all the pills you want. Inject until you look like a human pin cushion. It will not affect me in any way. I just feel compelled to try and give some sound advice about something I feel is more risky than the general musclehead will admit. In fact, I would hope the studies are wrong and everything is harmless. This would mean none of my friends here on IM will be at risk if they use them. But I don't beleive they are harmless. here is another helpful link http://espn.go.com/special/s/drugsan.../steroids.html Last edited by MeatheadSam : 12-24-2003 at 07:42 PM.
	Just a regular guy.

12-25-2003, 04:13 PM	#44
bandaidwoman inadvertant tree hugger Elite Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Atlanta, Georgia Posts: 601 Photos: 4	You confuse the media with scientific experts. True medical clincians will tell you there is no data that exxonerates or completely implicate the anabolic steroids in doing what they do. The best way to do that is to conduct a randomized , double blinded placebo controlled clinical trial, much like whats been done with estrogen hormones. None have been done to determine the long term effectsof anabolic steroids. So both parties can argue till they are blue, but to ignore the potential for harm is sticking your head in the sand. As for the studies above they are laughable. I will dissect the one regarding the heart. I never trust anyone to interpret scientific data for me, that's why the media always screws up. Regarding the study done at Prince Alfred Hospital in Australia. First of all, how long was their follow up in terms of coming to their conclusions that there were no significant changes in arterial structure or cardiac abnormalities.? Did they do cardiac catherizations, echocardiograms serially for just 6 months, 12 months, five years or up to ten years? (Remmber, if we suspect long term side effects this is important.) For instance, if you conducted a study on cholesterol drugs and followed people out for only six months you can conclude they confer absolutely no benefit (they don't show benefit until usually after 6 months). In addition, what was their study size, 12 people, 100 or thousands. There may be an error in clinical research called sample size error. Then there is the crap about the MRFIT study. The opposite holds true for women. As we age, our HDL decrease and LDL increase in direct correlation with our decrease in production of our endogenous estrogen. However, when we artificially replace it (as shown in the well designed Women's Health Initiative invovling hundreds and thousands of women and in a randomized,. double blinded, placebo controlled manner so doctors and patients were not biased) , the opposite occured. Contrary to medical opiniion, hormone replacement increased the heart attack and stroke risk. There needs to be a similar Men's Health Initiative trial to determine if exogenous testosterone replacement will protect against heart disease. In addition, Another study only studied 22 men for only a year and measured their cholesterol after testosterone enanthate supplementation. How this translated to lowering cardiac risk is ludicrous. It lowered LDL and did not change HDL but now with knowledge of subfractions of LDL and HDL (DO google on VAP) how do we know the subfractions were not shifted in a more unfavorable manner? I can keep going. The next study looked at twelve body builders (University Of North Texas) etc. etc The sample sizes were small, they only followed them for a year. They only looked at cholesterol numbers. All it says that testosterone may affect cholesterol numbers in a favorable manner, wether that correlates with clincical protection (once again depending on the subfractions of HDL either HDL1 or HDL2, LDLA, LDLB etc.) is a whole different ball game.
	Official Race Member of the Crank Crushing Rednecks Eat more mud, mountain bike until you die! XX Feminine power

12-25-2003, 04:28 PM	#45
MeatheadSam Member Elite Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Earth Posts: 169	I will just excuse myself from this debate and hire bandaidwoman to keep at it for me. But my main concern was to convey a need to be very careful and get medical consultation. And of course not to overdose any substance. Naturally if one has decided to use a substance then nothing will stop them. They have already decided the risks mean nothing. Any argument of the risks results in a state of denial of those risks based on poorly done studies designed to promote the use of the substance. Also, just a hypothetical situation here but lets say drug manufacturer A decides it needs "good" feedback to help its product sales. It is easy to get. You hire a non biased organization such as a university and fund them to do research which will benefit the education program. You define the limits of the study within boudaries which will almost assuredly produce an end result which will not be negative, ie, short term study or too few participants. Shazam! You will have a peice of "good" press to make the product seem benign to an uninformed victim.
	Just a regular guy.

12-24-2003, 05:35 PM	#32
Mudge Pizza the Hut Super Moderator Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 23,027 Photos: 1	The only "reliable" stories of roid rage I can think of are from: * High doses of fina * Cheque drops (probably #1) * Halotestin (probably #2)

12-25-2003, 02:35 PM	#43
Mudge Pizza the Hut Super Moderator Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 23,027 Photos: 1	Side effects http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/sh...threadid=18638 (Side effects of steroids) Your heart http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/sh...threadid=23901 (Steroids and your heart) Understanding liver values http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/sh...threadid=23142 (Understanding liver values) Death by statistics - nothing on steroids! Amazing isn't it http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/sh...threadid=23005 (Common causes of death by statistics) The darker side http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/sh...threadid=22779 (Article - The Dark Side of BB) The fallacy of roid rage http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/sh...threadid=21536 (Roid rage) American drug companies overpricing thier goods http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/sh...threadid=20800 (American drug companies want to suck you dry) Recovery after calling it quits http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/sh...threadid=21053 (Recovery after calling it quits) See also http://www.liverdoctor.com/ "The lack of scientific data has not deterred so-called medical experts, the media, and others from making unsupported and unsubstantiated claims about the damage and dangers of all anabolic steroid use." -Dr. R Scruggs

12-25-2003, 04:51 PM	#47
oaktownboy Registered User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: smog and fog Posts: 4,387	u know why this thread is comical...? we got a member arguing the studies don't mean crap, and she probably doesn't take anything yet she is arguing against bb who actually do and know the results and the overblown "roid rage" and shit like that////
	Chuck Norris once lost his keys and couldn't remember where he put them. So he tortured himself for half an hour until he gave up their location.

12-25-2003, 04:58 PM	#48
MeatheadSam Member Elite Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Earth Posts: 169	or she is just too smart to use something that couild cause her harm... Shoot up everyone, the juice is on me tonight! It is no wonder there is huge debate as to whether body bulding is actually a sport or even has merit as an athletic activity.
	Just a regular guy.

12-25-2003, 05:15 PM	#50
prolangtum Registered User Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 353	No one is saying they are side effect free, but the sides like liver hepatoxicity and roid rage are overblown.
	Mod @ Bulknutrition Forums Mod @ superiormuscle.com Mod @ steroidsupport.com Designersupps.com Bulknutrition.com Blackstarlabs.com