Hi folks. I'm a 56 year old athletic old dude. At one time I was in great shape... weight lifting and martial arts competitor.Doing both for approx 36 years. 2 years ago I was diagnosed with and treated for prostate cancer. For the past 2 years I have tested cancer free. I've read alot of conflicting reports on test boosting and cancer risks. Some reports say no connection and some say excess test, in addition to other factors, can cause increased cancer risk. Anyone out there know the real scoop on this? I'm just getting back into shape again and wanted to jump start my weightlifting/muscle production, as I have successfully done in the past, with a couple of cycles of light weight juice or even the new prohormone replacements, Methyl 1-D or Superdrol. I hate needles so I've made a topical, in the past, from Denkall Aqua Test (evaporated the water and marinated the crystals in DMSO). Worked really well. Extra Test makes me feel great. Any opinions on this issue from the pro's? I'm getting a Test check at the end of July. Suspect it will read low, since I'll be finished by about a week or so, with a Superdrol cycle.
Yeah... that's why he's testing me. I asked him for HRT a couple of days ago. Too bad if I can't do it, the extra Test feels so damned good, the workouts are great, and the muscle comes on fast. Once you get cancer there's so much to watch out for..... sugar, red meat, fat, nitrites etc.... tough way to live, but at least I'm still alive and kicking.
ABSOLUTELY NOT! The two most prone cells with the biggest receptor sites for anabolics are the breast and the prostate. 99% of cutting edge steroid books agree that injectable steroids are usually harmless if used in under a gram dosages, UJNLESS one is predisposed to genetic baldness or has a family history of porstate cancer... Much less already having had it yourself. Sounds like a death wish to me.
Hmm.. I'll look for the article, however, I believe there is supportive evidence at www.lef.org. Perhaps do a search at thier site. As I reflect on this and several other articles, some peoples genetic traits have a predisposition to turn test into DHT.. the hormone responsible for causing hormonal hair loss. Some anabolics are very likely to turn to DHT (a bad thing) like tren especially. Different anablolics have different affinities to turn to DHT but tren is the worst, probably followed by sus and prop. Of course, there are some slow to aromatise anabolics out there such as deca, primo and anavar come to mind.
It may be a good idea to buy the book 'anabolics' that digs much deeper into this subject available at meso-rx. Good luck putting a safe cycle together and slowing the inevatable.
Just to set the record straight. I don't have a prostate anymore. I had it removed with robotic surgery two years ago (the DiVinci robot). Very interesting experience, also a testament to being in shape as an old fart. The docs said I had the fastest recovery they had ever seen. I got in really great shape before I went in. Anyway.... I don't have a prostate anymore. Also don't have a couple of glands and seminal vessicles. Those were all removed and biopsied just to be sure the cancer hadn't spread. It hadn't. They got it all, And for the last two years I have tested with a PSA of zero. I get tested every 6 months now. It was every three months for the first year.
So..... does this change anything? I can't get prostate cancer anymore. I did a long cycle of low dose aqua test last year, with no rise in any cancer related variables. Thanks for all the feedback guys I really do appreciate it. I'm working hard to get back in shape. Those six holes in my belly and peeing all over myself slowed me down a bit. Everything is much better now. Erections are even back, with or without ciallis, though ciallis makes them rock hard. Very cool invention, that stuff.
Oh, one more thing.... I have no family history of prostate cancer. My dad is 87 and his PSA is 1.5. Pisses me off. I have an uncle on mothers side, with a PSA of 15 for last 10 years.... but.... no cancer. Very strange. I'll tell you what though, I eat very little red meat now... or hot dogs or sausages etc.
Determined aren't we?.. Joking. You may have removed some glands and body parts that were suseptable to cancer risk yes. However, JAMA said that everybody on the planet has cancer, it's the part of the immune system that keeps it in check. I do, to be clear, have had a lifting partner that juiced to the gills after a nasty bout with skin cancer. DURING his cancer his PSA was well within limits, and his family had a predisposition to prostate cancer. Hey, we all take tremendous risks when "juicing", I'd be more concerned about what exactly is in the bottle I'm getting ready to put in my body. That could lead to instant death, not just a quickening.
JAMA = Journal of the American Medical Association
DHT binds much more tightly to androgen receptor than testosterone. MPB (alopecia aerata), as result of DHT imbalance in skin, may result from hypersensitivity to DHT, from androgen receptor (AR) upregulation (meaning a physical increase in AR from gene expression) or from an increase in the cytochrome P450, 5-alpha reductase, an enzyme that converts test to DHT in dermal tissue.
Androgen receptor itself doesn't cause cancer, it does however signal for a cascade of events in cells in which its enriched, muscle, and sex steroid responsive tissues. It also signals for immune system function, as muscle requires support tissue function (tissue peripheral to muscle fiber - connective, repairs and blood and lymph supply).
Now, here's why tight binding DHT is a problem. Its not DHT binding to androgen receptor, its DHT binding to other nuclear receptors that also regulate immune system function, that the rub. Its not test, its DHT, the point IronHorse was trying to bring out, in his comments on the relative binding strength of AR receptor activators.
But here's a hint; its also a function of the presence of other nuclear receptor activators, common in a well balanced diet. They also compete for time at the docking stations (receptor binding sites) of nuclear receptors present in all tissue, but they vary in their combiantion. Its not so much AR being goosed by anabolics, its also who else is being tickled by tight binding steroid analogs, overactivating otherwise carefully maintained cell turnover control elements.
Who would have thought, just a decade ago, that the secret to ultimate homeostatic health and disease prevention, including cancer, lies in the action of bioactive lipids in your food, many of them potent antioxidants. Nearly all of these compounds originate in vegetables and fruits. And they are all present at low physiological concentrations.
Hence, the comment about AAS dose effects made earlier in this thread by IronHorse, an astute observation well worth considering.
I've just re-read Ironhorse'e original post and realised it could be read two ways: firstly, if you have the genetic predisposition you are more likely to get MPB or prostate cancer; secondly (the way I read it first time around) if you have a genetic predisposition to MPB you are more likely to get prostate cancer.
I understand how DHT is the culprit here, whether as DHT-derived AAS including the other wise mild primobolan or as the result of conversion from test. What I still don't understand is whether there is any (scientific) evidence to suggest that because I am prone to MPB (I am) I am more likely to get prostate cancer.
Sure, let me clarify my previous answer, which did indeed address your question, but it must not be real clear to you.
1. If you have DHT sensitivity, you're gonna scale up the response of androgen receptors on prostate cells.
2. Just bout all the darned biomedical research on androgen receptor (AR) relates to prostate cancer. That should tell you something right there.
3. DHT sensitivty has been correlated to AR upregulation and cancer forming potential (hyperplasia) in susceptible males.
1 + 2 = 2
Sensitivity generally means that you have an altered transcript of the androgen receptor gene, and that gives you a slightly different androgen receptor protein than you would normally have. Sometimes its genetic cause, and sometimes its a change in the nuclear receptor activator promoter elements.
Thats an area I'm working on, on the side.
I think you got the latter case, and if so, don't matter hill o beans if you got hairy assed apes in your gene pool. Its environmental factors or exposure to certain steroid analogs, or maybe exposure to some pesticide, thats done changed your programming.
I got threads in other forums that talk about the sophisitcated molecular handwaving explanations of nuclear receptor cross talk. Thats not needed here, just for you to know that yeah, theres a connection.