Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

Ecstacy and testosterone levels

str8cubano

New member
Maybe you guys have read something about this....but anyways, i did a cycle of winny, and in the middle of my clomid theorapy. I dont usually take Ecstacy, but freinds bday in 1 week. South beach and all.....hey i can't say no. So anyways, i was curious if any of you guys know if MDMA (ecstacy) lowers testosterone levels or hurts recouperation of T levels while on clomid?
 
athlete03 said:
Those shouldn't either. Most rec drugs don't. Some studies show that Marijuana does, however.

Block et al (1995) performed a study where cannabis increased testosterone levels. Other recent studies have found no effect of cannabis on testosterone. Ecstacy causes little if any suppression. Another study showed valium to have testosterone increasing properties...

I'll dig up the papers..
 
From: "Exposing Marijuana Myths: (The Lindesmith Center)" page 93;"Studies of men in the general population have also failed to find differences in the testosterone levels of marijuana users and nonusers. "There is no convincing evidence of infertility related to marijuana consumption in humans. "There are no epidemiological studies showing that men who use marijuana have higher rates of infertility than men who do not. Nor is there evidence of diminished reproductive capacity among men in countries where marijuana use is common."

Abel, E.L., et al, "Marijuana and Sex: A Critical Survey," Drug and Alcohol Dependence 8: 1-22 (1981)

Ehrenkranz, J.R.L. and Hembee, WC., "Effects of Marijuana on Male Reproductive Function," Psychiatric Annals 16: 243-49 (1986)

Cushman, P, "Plasma Testosterone Levels in Healthy Male Marijuana Smokers," American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse 2: 269-75 (1975)

Block, R I, et al, "Effects of Chronic Marijuana Use of Testosterone, Luteinizing Hormone, Follicle Stimulating Hormone, Prolactin and Cortisol in Men and women,"Drug and Alcohol Dependence 28,: 121-28 (1991)
 
(3) NEW STUDY FINDS POT DOESN'T LOWER TESTOSTERONE

A new study by Dr. Robert Block at the University of
Iowa disputes the commonly held notion that marijuana alters
the level of testosterone and other sex hormones.
The study contradicted a widely publicized 1974 study
by Dr. R.C. Kolodony, which reported decreased testosterone
levels in men who smoked marijuana chronically.
The U. of Iowa study found that chronic marijuana use
had no effect on testosterone, luteinizing hormone, follicle
stimulating hormone, prolactin and cortisol in men or women.
Noting that six other studies had failed to show
lowered testosterone levels in men, Dr. Block concluded: "It
appears that marijuana, even heavy use of the kind that's
typical in the United States, doesn't alter testosterone levels."
However, he cautioned that heavy use might have other
adverse effects, including "possible effects on reproductive
function and mild, selective cognitive impairments associated
with heavy, chronic use."
Block's study is published in Drug and Alcohol
Dependence, Vol. 28: 121-8 (1991).
:fro:
 
Hormones Chronic marijuana use has not been found to alter testosterone or other sex hormone levels, despite the conclusions of Dr. R.C. Kolodony's 1974 study. Seven similar studies have been performed since then, the most recent by a Dr. Robert Block at the University of Iowa, and none have reproduced Kolodony's results. In contrast, heavy alcohol use is known to lower these same testosterone levels. Reproductive Damage No trustworthy study has ever shown that marijuana use damages the reproductive system, or causes chromosome breakage. Dr. Gabriel Nahas reached the opposite conclusion in his experiments performed in the early 1980s, but did so in part using the in vitro (i.e., in test tubes and petrii dishes) cells of rhesus monkeys. His rather unjustified claim that these changes would also occur in human bodies in vivo (in the body) was criticized by his colleagues and, in 1983, he renounced his own results. Studies of actual human populations have failed to demonstrate that marijuana adversely affects the reproductive system. Wu et al. found in 1988 a correlation between marijuana use and low sperm counts in human males. But this is misleading because (1) a decrease in sperm count has not been shown to have a negative effect on fertility, and (2) the sperm count returned to normal levels after marijuana use had ceased. Claims that marijuana use may impair hormone production, menstrual cycles, or fertility in females are both unproven and unfounded. The Immune System Studies in which lab rats were injected with extremely large quantities of THC have found that marijuana (in such unrealistically huge quantities) does have an "immunosuppressive effect" in those lab rats, in that it temporarily shuts off certain cells in the liver called lymphocytes and macrophages. These macrophages are useful in fighting off bacterial, not viral, infections. But this is only for the duration of intoxication. There also exists some evidence that marijuana metabolites stay in the lungs for up to seven months after smoking has ceased, possibly affecting the immune system of the lungs (but not by turning the cells off). This said, doctors and researchers are still not sure that the immune system is actually negatively affected in realistic situations since there are no numbers to support the idea. In fact, three studies showed that THC may have actually stimulated the immune system in the people studied. Birth Defects Unlike alcohol, cocaine, and tobacco, studies show that there exists no evident link between prenatal use of marijuana and birth defects or fetal alcohol syndrome in humans. In fact, marijuana use during the third trimester has been found to have a positive impact on birthweight. It is known that Delta-9-THC does enter the placenta, so mothers are advised against consuming large quantities.


:fro: :alien: :alien
 
A widely held claim has also been that cannabis lowers male testosterone levels (Kolodny, 1974). This theory has been challenged by several studies (Block, 1991; Mendelson et al., 1974; Coggins et al., 1976) that found no correlation at all. Marijuana and Health (Natl. Acad. Sciences, Inst. Medicine, 1982), also, after reviewing literature at that time, concluded that "Due to conflicting and incomplete evidence, it is not possible to conclude at the present time whether marijuana smoking has a significant effect upon gonadotropic and testosterone concentrations in humans."
 
Ecstasy causes the increased release of serotonin, a neurotransmitter that is responsible for regulating mood, memory, pain perception, sleep and appetite. It also releases dopamine and norephinephrine, two other neurotransmitters.......

testosterone? 1 pill? You are more at risk (of losing muscle) from the general partying all night and dehydration.. but you gotta live and have fun. You will not find any studies on ecstacy and testosterone. I say considering the above. ecstacy = negligble partying with or without ecstacy = more likely to consume gains espesh if you like dancing...

I thankyou.;)
 
MDMA does not directly effect Test levels, however, I think that walking around with light sticks on your hat and a pacifier in your mouth ....... can't be helping your Test levels much.

LOL
 
Dr. R.C. Kolodony's 1974 study.

is the stupid wank bitch study everyone qoutes. this is the one shit study that you all keep qouting. Above you'll read how loads more since have found no reducing of test.

I thankyou.:fro:
 
Riker29 said:
MDMA does not directly effect Test levels, however, I think that walking around with light sticks on your hat and a pacifier in your mouth ....... can't be helping your Test levels much.

LOL

don't knock it, till you tried it!!!!!!!!

don't forget the tunes for afterwards :fro:
 
athlete03 said:
What does MDMA do to dopamine?

it raises dopamine levels. in fact it is pro-dopamine and pro-seratonin, more seratonergic than dopaminergic.

the study below deals with trying to determine which has the greater effect, drugs affecting seratonin levels or drugs affecting dopamine levels, on stimulus and reinforcing effects on humans. and from what i can understand of the study, they still don't know if MDMA has a direct effect on dopamine levels, or if it increases as a result of the increase in seratonin (even though seratonin reportedly decreases dopamine levels).

fuck, all i know is that it fucks with dopamine levels.... so there :finger:.


here's the study:

experiments described in this proposal is to increase our understanding of the interaction between serotonin (5-HT) and dopamine (DA) systems in mediating the subjective, discriminative stimulus, and reinforcing effects of psychostimulant drugs in humans. This proposal will use three primary approaches to study DA/5-HT interactions: first, a drug with mixed DA/5-HT properties, 3,4- methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), will be compared to drugs with more selective DA (e.g., d- amphetamine) vs. 5-HT (e.g., d-fenfluramine) mechanisms of action; second, d-amphetamine and d-fenfluramine will be co- administered in such a way as to produce mixed DA/5-HT effects which will be compared to the effects of the compounds administered alone; and third, serotonin- mediated effects will be blocked either by fluoxetine or tryptophan depletion in order to isolate the effects of dopamine with the expectation that this blockade will have differential effects on amphetamine, fenfluramine and MDMA.

Although amphetamine and fenfluramine are similar structurally, they have significantly different subjective, discriminative stimulus and reinforcing effects. These differences in dependence-related effects are presumably related to the fact that amphetamine produces prominent effects on DA systems whereas fenfluramine´s effects are mediated primarily by 5-HT systems. Interestingly, MDMA, which structurally is an amphetamine derivative, has prominent effects on both 5-HT and DA brain systems but unlike fenfluramine has abuse potential more like that of amphetamine. Thus, MDMA may be a useful compound for investigating the interactions among neurochemical systems as they relate to effects of drugs that are dependence-related. Although most psychostimulants that are abused alter norepinephrine (NE), DA, and to a lesser degree 5-HT levels, there are compelling data that DA systems play the major role in the reinforcing properties and other dependence- related effects of psychostimulant drugs. On the other hand, DA and 5-HT neurochemical systems are known to interact; for instance, recent studies have demonstrated a potentiation of impulse-dependent DA release by 5-HT. MDMA, whose effects have been attributed to its actions on 5-HT systems as well as DA has been shown in animal studies to share discriminative stimulus and reinforcing effects with amphetamine. On the other hand, humans have also reported that it produces hallucinogenic- like effects. Animal brain dialysis studies have shown that pretreatment with selective 5-HT reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs such as fluoxetine, Prozac) will prevent fenfluramine from producing 5-HT release. Similarly, the 5-HT releasing property of MDMA is blocked by pretreatment with the selective SSRIs. The SSRIs provides us with a useful tool for investigating in humans how the dependence related actions of MDMA are modified by manipulations of its effects on 5-HT.

To date, there are no well designed, double-blind studies of MDMA compared with prototypical psychostimulants or 5- HT releasing drugs. Based on animal research and reports of its abuse, we are hypothesizing that MDMA will resemble d- amphetamine more than d-fenfluramine in terms of its mood- altering properties although it may produce additional hallucinogenic effects. In addition, we hypothesize that MDMA, like amphetamine, will increase motor activity. On the other hand, we hypothesize d-amphetamine and MDMA will differ in a laboratory test of aggression, the point subtraction aggression paradigm, with d-amphetamine at the doses being used increasing aggression and MDMA decreasing it.

To characterize the discriminative stimulus properties of MDMA in recreational drug users. Based upon the results of animal research we are hypothesizing that MDMA will share discriminative properties with d-amphetamine but not d- fenfluramine. Specifically we are hypothesizing that subjects trained to discriminate between placebo, d-amphetamine and d-fenfluramine will respond to MDMA as if it is d- amphetamine. Recreational drug users will be trained to discriminate 10 mg/70 kg d-amphetamine from 30 mg/70 kg d-fenfluramine and placebo and tested with two doses of MDMA (to be determined in pilot study) to evaluate its discriminative properties, i.e., whether it is more amphetamine-like or fenfluramine-like.

To systematically measure the interaction of d- amphetamine and d-fenfluramine in healthy volunteers. The hypothesis is that increasing 5-HT release by the administration of d-fenfluramine will decrease the subjective stimulant effects of d-amphetamine and d-amphetamine will attenuate the typical aversive subjective effects of d- fenfluramine. A secondary hypothesis is that some of these drug combinations will result in subjective effects that resemble MDMA (mixed stimulant and hallucinogenic effects). Subjects will receive a fixed dose of d-amphetamine (10 mg/70 kg) in combination with a range of d-fenfluramine doses (15 mg/70 kg, 30 mg/70 kg, and placebo). A second group of subjects will receive a fixed dose of d-fenfluramine (15 mg/70 kg) in combination with a range of d-amphetamine doses (10 mg/70 kg, 20 mg/70 kg, and placebo).

To evaluate the effect of pretreatment with fluoxetine on the behavioral and subjective effects of d-amphetamine, d- fenfluramine, and MDMA in recreational drug users. The hypothesis is that fluoxetine, by blocking the 5-HT transporter and thereby preventing the uptake of d- fenfluramine into neurons where it can release 5-HT, will block to a major degree its characteristic subjective effect profile. In contrast, pretreatment with fluoxetine will have only minor effects on the stimulant-like subjective and reinforcing effects of d-amphetamine. Although it is known that MDMA´s effects on serotonergic neurons can be blocked by fluoxetine, we are hypothesizing that MDMA´s stimulant-like and dependence-producing effects are mediated by DA, and that fluoxetine pretreatment would not significantly attenuate them. However, any of MDMA´s effects which are mediated by 5-HT (e.g., changes in the LSD scale score of the ARCI, changes in the Hallucinogen Rating Scale), will be attenuated. Subjects will be randomized to receive pre-treatment with fluoxetine or placebo. Subjects in both groups will then be tested with single doses of placebo, d-fenfluramine (30 mg/70 kg), d-amphetamine (10 mg/70 kg), and MDMA (dose to be determined) under double-blind, balanced-order conditions. The subjective and reinforcing effects of the MDMA, d- amphetamine, d-fenfluramine and placebo will be compared across groups.

The tryptophan depletion paradigm, which transiently reduces brain 5-HT levels, will be used to investigate the effect of acute reduction in presynaptic 5-HT levels on the subjective and reinforcing properties of d-fenfluramine, d- amphetamine and MDMA. The hypothesis is that tryptophan depletion, but not sham depletion (tryptophan is added back to the amino-acid slurry), will attenuate the characteristic subjective and reinforcing effects of d-fenfluramine and produce only modest attenuation of the stimulant-like effects of d-amphetamine. As in the experiment with fluoxetine, the effects of depletion on MDMA´s effects will be a function of which neurochemical system is mediating its dependence- related effects. We are hypothesizing that depletion of 5-HT will attenuate the hallucinogenic effects of MDMA but have little effect on the stimulant and reinforcing effects of MDMA. Volunteers will be randomly assigned to one of four groups. Each subject will undergo both tryptophan and sham depletion paradigms under double-blind conditions. At the nadir of plasma tryptophan levels, each of the groups will receive either d-amphetamine (10 mg/70 kg), d-fenfluramine (30 mg/70 kg), or MDMA (dose to be determined), or placebo.

In conjunction with the studies outlined above blood samples will be collected for the measurement of homovanillic acid (HVA), the principal metabolite of dopamine, as well as cortisol and prolactin. These measures will provide objective data about the neurochemical and neurohormonal effects of the various drugs alone and in combination. This will allow the correlation of drug induced mood and behavioral changes with the neurochemical and neurohormonal changes mediated by DA and 5-HT. This series of studies will provide novel and scientifically valuable information about the role of DA/5-HT interactions in the subjective, discriminative stimulus, and reinforcing effects of psychostimulant drugs in humans. In addition, these studies will provide objective data on the neurochemical, neurohormonal, subjective and reinforcing effects of MDMA under standardized laboratory conditions.

There is a large, often conflicting literature describing functional 5-HT and DA system interactions both in vitro and in vivo. Some studies report an inhibition of DA systems by 5-HT while others report a 5-HT facilitation of impulse-dependent DA release.

In behavioral paradigms, it appears that increased 5-HT activity does decrease the reinforcing properties of d- amphetamine. For instance, acute administration of the 5-HT precursor L-tryptophan, the 5-HT releasing agent d-fenfluramine, the direct 5-HT agonist quipazine, and the 5-HT reuptake inhibitor fluoxetine decreased the rate of amphetamine self- administration, while chemical 5-HT depletions enhance the rate of responding for amphetamine.

Furthermore, the 5-HT antagonist metergoline enhanced d-amphetamine self- administration, while cyproheptidine and methysergide reduced self-administration frequency. This inhibitory interaction between 5-HT and DA systems was consistent with a recent drug interaction study in humans in which a mutual antagonism of the mood altering properties of D,L-fenfluramine and phentermine were observed. Interestingly, in a drug discrimination paradigm in rats, this combination was discriminated as more cocaine-like than either drug alone. This points to the importance of studying the interaction of d- amphetamine and fenfluramine in humans.


On the other hand, two studies in cocaine abusing human subjects report the opposite interaction. Satel et al., (1995) and Aronson et al. (1995) reported that tryptophan depletion, a procedure which acutely decreases 5-HT levels in the brain resulted in a decreased subjective response to intranasal administration of cocaine and to decreased cue-induced cocaine craving. Taken together, these different results may be a function of drug (cocaine versus d- amphetamine), different experimental paradigms, different brain regions being examined, different procedures, as well as different species. Nevertheless, this sort of conflicting data speaks to the need to conduct additional research in humans.

d-Amphetamine is a prototypical psychostimulant drug which is used clinically in the treatment of narcolepsy and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. In humans it has positive subjective effects, increasing vigor, elation, arousal, and positive mood, is clearly discriminated from caffeine and fenfluramine, but not phenmetrazine, is reinforcing, and has a biphasic response on aggression with low doses increasing aggressive responding and higher doses decreasing the aggressive responses. d-Fenfluramine is a potent 5-HT releaser and reuptake blocker which has recently been approved by the FDA as a treatment for obesity. Much less research work has been done in humans with this more selective enantiomer than with its racemic (d,l-) form. Although the studies in this proposal will use d-fenfluramine, it is assumed that these effects will be similar to those produced by d,l-fenfluramine. d,l- Fenfluramine has been shown to have mildly aversive subjective effects (increased anxiety and confusion and decreased elation and positive mood scales on the POMS; Brauer et al., 1996), is discriminated from d-amphetamine (Chait et al., 1986), is not reinforcing in humans or rhesus monkeys. Although no clinical data from humans has indicated any long-term problems with fenfluramine, animals studies in rats, guinea pigs, and rhesus monkeys have indicated that there are long- term changes in 5-HT neurons that may even be irreversible in particular brain regions.

The pharmacology of MDMA is well known from animal studies and there have been numerous studies comparing it to prototypic dopaminergic (e.g., amphetamine) and serotonergic (e.g., fenfluramine) drugs.

There is evidence that MDMA is self-administered in monkeys (Beardsley et al., 1986) suggesting human abuse liability. However, there are no well- controlled studies comparing the subjective (reinforcing) or objective (changes in temperature, heart rate or blood pressure) effects of MDMA in human subjects to other drugs, such as d-amphetamine and/or d-fenfluramine (McCann and Ricaurte, 1993; Grob et al., 1992; Liester et al., 1992). The only data that are available are retrospective subjective reports of symptoms experienced following MDMA ingestion (Greer and Talbert 1986; Downing 1986; Peroutka et al., 1988). In these reports, users describe a wide range of subjective effects ranging from "altered time perception" or a sense of "closeness" with other people, increased alertness, luminescence of objects, and decreased "hostility." It is important to note that the MDMA was usually taken in a social context in which people were told what effects they would experience. These expectations may have been of great importance in modulating the subjective experiences produced by MDMA. Common side effects or adverse effects reported by MDMA users include: insomnia, nausea, tight jaw muscles, dry mouth, diaphoresis, trouble concentrating, palpitations, tremor, and increased body temperature. Much less commonly, there are single case reports of liver failure, accidents, and cerebral hemorrhage (see Green et al., 1995 for review). Grob et al., (1996) have recently reported that low doses of MDMA (1 mg/kg) cause robust increases in prolactin and adrenocorticotropin hormone levels compared with placebo.


MDMA has more serotonergic activity than d- amphetamine and like fenfluramine, high doses have been associated with selective damage to serotonergic systems with a sparing of DA systems in rats and non-human primates. Interestingly, in mice, MDMA caused DA not 5-HT neurotoxicity. Moreover, unlike other neurotoxins such as 1- methyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine [MPTP] which has been associated with severe depletion of dopamine and clinical symptoms of Parkinson´s disease, there is no clear evidence that MDMA use results in any neurotoxicity in humans. Ricaurte and associates (1990) have reported decreased cerebral spinal fluid 5-HIAA (the primary serotonin metabolite) levels in subjects who had previously taken MDMA (as well as other drugs) ­ although there were no physical or psychological symptoms associated with these changes nor was MDMA use verified or the potential influence of others factors controlled.


The mechanism by which [MDMA] exerts its unique effects in humans is not well understood and cannot be reliably extrapolated from the animal literature or retrospective reports in humans. The studies in this application are designed to provide important information about the effects of MDMA in humans. In the proposed studies, several subjective (Johanson and Uhlenhuth, 1980) and behavioral measures will be used to compare across drugs. In addition to standard subjective effects, the discriminative stimulus effects of amphetamine, fenfluramine, and MDMA will be compared. Drug discrimination procedures provide a powerful technique to classify and differentiate closely related compounds and provide important information concerning their mechanisms of action. MDMA is discriminated as amphetamine in d-amphetamine trained rats, pigeons, and rhesus monkeys, but also as fenfluramine in fenfluramine-trained rats. In rats trained to discriminate MDMA, d- amphetamine did not substitute for MDMA, while fenfluramine partially substituted. Evans, et al. (1990), showed in a three-way discrimination (amphetamine, fenfluramine, placebo) in pigeons that MDMA had both amphetamine-like and fenfluramine-like effects with differences across individuals and across doses. This study is being conducted in "recreational drug users." Individuals who have tried drugs of abuse but have not developed drug abuse problems are ideal from an ethical viewpoint since their failure to become drug abusers, even though they have passed through the age of risk for severe drug dependence (Anthony et al., 1994; Breslau et al., 1993) and have sampled some drugs of abuse, means that exposure to amphetamine in a laboratory study would be an insignificant risk factor. Amphetamine and fenfluramine are therapeutic drugs and are frequently given to naive patients as part of outpatient therapy with little evidence of iatrogenic dependence (Schuster, 1989). Finally, d-amphetamine in the 10 mg/70 kg to 35 mg/70 kg dose proposed in the present have been given to normal volunteers in previous studies with no reports of serious adverse reactions. In addition to comparison studies using subjective, discriminative stimulus, and reinforcing effects, drug interaction studies may help elucidate the mechanism of action mediating various subjective, behavioral and physiological effects of drugs. In the present studies, 5-HT systems are being manipulated by acute treatments with fluoxetine (5-HT transporter inhibitor) and with tryptophan depletion. These studies, will provide important information regarding which effects of MDMA and d-amphetamine are mediated by serotonin. It might be expected for example that the activity increasing effects of MDMA would be unaffected by manipulations which decrease serotonin activity whereas any hallucinogenic effects of MDMA would be attenuated.¥
 
When it keeps getting asked again and again - "does cannabis decrease testosterone... why doesn't the definitive answer (this thread) get a stickY?:D
 
probably because they'd have to change the name of it otherwise people would only think to look in it if they were under the assumption that ecstacy decreased test.
 
MDMA does not directly effect Test levels, however, I think that walking around with light sticks on your hat and a pacifier in your mouth ....... can't be helping your Test levels much.

whoa, you do that too...?:D
 
The thing is.........smoking marijuana gives you the munchies right ??? Often people go for the "sugary" sweets (I've heard that it's because weed lowers your insulin levels, and sweets are the fastest way to get them back)..........and eating too much sugar raises ESTROGEN.....which in turn lowers testosterone levels.

Keep in mind that today's high grade cannabis can cause crazy binge style munchies....LOTS OF CANDY/ SWEETS consumption.....over time won't this lead to DAILY raise estrogen (for daily tokers) and so lower test as a result ??
 
Top Bottom