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

The truth about orals! Read this!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Juice Authority
  • Start date Start date
J

Juice Authority

Guest
Many people seem to think that running orals is hard on liver because of what they read of the drug profiles. If you investigate beyond what it is said on the profiles you'll find some interesting studies and research that contradicts this common misconception. Case in point the article below.

Hepatoxicty: Fact or Fiction
by Roy Harper


We all know that the alpha alkylated steroids are hepatotoxic, right….. But, is there actually any truth to this? We’ve been told for years that if you take 17 alpha-alkylated steroids, you will eventually run into liver problems. Never combine 17 aa’s, never go beyond 50mg day, never go longer than 4 weeks, etc. All of this is crap! As I we walk you through some studies, today, you’ll see 17 alpha-alkylated steroids can be hepatotoxic but not to the degree you would think.

To make a steroid hepatotoxic, you need only a small change to a steroid molecule; A strong bond that cannot readily be down broken by enzymes in the liver. This may be a bond at the 17th position, or even at the 1st position (as in methenolone or proviron). Because the liver cannot easily break the steroid down before it is released in to the blood stream, this also results in the steroid to becoming more orally bio-available.

We can see that the liver has to work harder to break down these steroids. Enzymes in the blood and tissue easily metabolize other steroids such as Testosterone. Commonly, this increase in liver activity has been viewed as a harmful process, but as you will see, this increase is, in and of itself, irrelevant. The liver is THE filter of the human body -- it can figure out what to do with just about anything. The only real problem comes in when one keeps their liver at full blast for long periods of time.

Let’s look at some studies showing the hepatotoxicity of steroids. Here's one of my favorites, a study published in 1979[1]. Essentially, researches did a study of deaths caused by hepatic angiosarcoma (a malignant tumor of vascular tissue in the liver) between 1964 and 1974. Researchers found 131 reported cases of death from hepatic angiosarcoma. Out of the 131 cases, 3.1% (4 cases) were reported to be at all related to the use of androgenic-anabolic steroids. Keep in mind that these 4 people could have liver complications before any steroids were used, aka a genetic disposition. In fact there is no proof, in this study at least, that the anabolic-androgenic steroids even caused the hepatic angiosarcoma.

This is the classic case of associating a cause with an effect, without any evidence, aside from both existing. Furthermore, based on the above numbers, there are only 0.4 cases of hepatic angiosarcoma reported each year, by those using AAS. Now consider the number of people on steroids at this time. Now factor in all the people that don’t know their ass from a hole in the ground when it comes to using AAS, properly. Clearly, this is very week evidence. Lastly there has not been a real increase in hepatic angiosarcoma since the early seventies. Meanwhile, there has been a huge, almost exponential, increase in steroid use during this period.

Another study, that somewhat supports the previous hepatotoxicity case, showed the possibilities of hepatic adenomas(cysts in the liver) caused by androgenic-anabolic steroids[2]. In this study, a Japanese girl was found to have multiple liver lesions after the use of the drug oxymetholone (aka Anadrol). Most everyone “knows” that Anadrol is linked with liver problems, but a closer inspection into this study shows more.

Apparently, this girl, starting at the age of 14, was diagnosed with aplastic anemia. She was prescribed oxymetholone at 30mg per day. This continued for 6 years until the lesions first appeared. Assuming that the girl was most likely around 100 lbs., this was a pretty heavy dosage. If you extrapolated this data out to a 200 - 250lbs. male, that would be taking approximately 60 - 90mg of anadrol per day for 6 years. Ouch!

The researchers also stated that there were only 17 other cases of hepatic adenomas, found in English literature between 1975 and 1998. They failed to mention the causes of these 17 cases, but there is no reason to believe they were all using 17-AA androgens and 17 is certainly miniscule compared to the number of people who have used them. The authors’ finish off the study by saying the following: "This report may be helpful in identifying the population who is at risk of developing hepatic sex hormone-related tumors." So remember, if you're a small 14-year-old girl taking 30mg of Anadrol per day for 6 years, you may be at risk!

Let's move on to some more useful studies. Take for example a 1995 study that showed the toxic effects of anabolic-androgenic steroids in primary rat hepatic cell cultures[3]. In this study the researchers used the following drugs and dosages:

Steroid
1x10^-8M
1x10^-6M
1x10^-4M

19-nortestosterone
0.002744mg
0.2744mg
27.44mg

Fluoxymesterone
0.003365mg
0.3365mg
33.65mg

Testosterone cypionate
0.004126mg
0.4126mg
41.26mg

Stanozolol
0.003285mg
0.3285mg
32.85mg

Danazol
N/A
N/A
N/A

Oxymetholone
0.003325mg
0.3325mg
33.25mg

Testosterone
0.002884mg
0.2884mg
28.84mg

Estradiol
0.0027424mg
0.2724mg
27.24mg

Methyltestosterone
0.003024mg
0.3024mg
30.24mg


As proof of the hepatoxicity they used Lactate dehydrogenase release, neutral red retention, and glutathione depletion to determine plasma membrane damage, cell viability, and possible oxidative injury, respectively.

What they showed was that the 17 alpha-alkylated steroids, methyltestosterone, stanozolol and oxymetholone, significantly increased Lactate dehydrogenase release and decreased neutral red retention at the 1x10^-4M dosage for 24h. Both methyltestosterone and oxymetholone also showed depleted glutathione at the 1x10^-4M dosage after 2h, 6h and 8h treatments. In other words they increased liver activity. You may also note that the other, non-alkylated steroids showed no significant difference in any levels. All in all this not only shows that 17 alpha-alkylated steroids are directly “hepatotoxic”, but also non-alkylated steroids are note hepatotoxic at all. But is this a real measure of hepatotoxicity? There is yet to be any correlation between the increase of the above-mentioned measurement and “hepatotoxicity”. Obviously, high dosages of the 17 alpha-alkylated steroids are potentially dangerous, but upon closer inspection, the study reveals more.

Take a look, the researchers took cell cultures from the liversse of 60-day-old Sprague-Dawley rats. Not only are rat livers much smaller than human livers, but these were merely cultures. Furthermore, it was the 1x10^-4M concentrations that caused the most changes, but these are approximately 1 to a 1/3 of a full, daily human dosage -- at least for the 17 alpha-alkylated steroids. Even at the 1x10^-6M concentration, there were no significant changes observed. It's apparent that the levels of 17 alpha-alkylated steroids used were potentially toxic, but for a human to take the same amount would be insane. I'm guessing this could translate to maybe 4 grams every 24 hours or 28 grams a week if not more.

What is common so far is we can only prove that any steroid, that is believed to be hepatotoxic, only increases liver activity. I’ll say it again, where is the correlation to hepatotoxicity? We know that if the liver is running at 100% for long periods this may cause complications, but this is akin to any other chemical, which is metabolized by the liver. Ever noticed that liver cancer due to alcoholism takes decades of constant alcohol abuse? It’s apparent that the possibility for hepatotoxicity is there, but for the smart steroid user this is nearly an impossible task.

Another study done in 1999, attempted to show the acute and chronic effects of stanozolol on the liver[4]. In acute treatments of stanozolol, dosages not mentioned, both cytochrome P456 and b5 (microsomal enzymes) levels dropped after 48 hours, and then at 72 hours, levels significant increased. On the other hand, with chronic treatments, time or dosage not mentioned, these microsomal enzymes showed a decrease in levels. Researchers showed that both acute and chronic treatments resulted in "slight to moderate inflammatory or degenerative lesions in centrilobular hepatocytes", but the authors did not note true hepatotoxicity.

How about we look at the other side of the story, the good studies. For instance, in a 1999 study, which looked at the effects of an 8-week cycle of 17 alpha-alkylated steroids[5]. The researchers used fluoxymesterone, methylandrostanolone, or stanozolol on rats at 2mg/kg-body weight, five times a week for 8 weeks. That's 182mg per dosage, for a 200lb man, or 910mg per week. Half of the rats were sedentary and the other were trained on a treadmill.

Levels of NADH-cytochrome c reductase, succinate cytochrome c reductase, and cytochrome oxidase (showing liver activity), increased in the steroid-administered rats, while citrate synthase showed no change. Comparatively, in vitro, the "cytochrome oxidase and citrate synthase activities were insensitive to the AAS, whereas NADH-cytochrome c reductase and succinate cytochrome c reductase activities were partly inhibited."

Furthermore, in vivo, each rat had liver enzyme levels that were within normal range. From this, the researchers determined that the steroid-administered rats, trained or sedentary, did not show "...classical serum indicators of hepatic function". Extrapolating this, 910mg a week for 8 weeks could potentially have little to no effect on the liver in humans.

As for human studies, in 1999 researchers tried to prove that the hepatotoxicity of steroids is overstated[6]. In this study, 15 of the participants were bodybuilders using self-administered steroid dosages and 10 were non-steroid bodybuilders. Serum data was compared to 49 patients with viral hepatitis, and 592 exercising and non-exercising medical students. [

All of the bodybuilders showed increases in aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and creatine kinase (CK) while gamma-glutamyltranspeptidase (GGT) levels were in the normal range. In comparison, hepatitis patients showed increased ALT, AST, and GGT levels while the control exercising medical students showed increased CK levels. From this, the researchers suggested that it is the correlation between AST, ALT and GGT that shows true liver dysfunction. Keep in mind, we can only guess that the 15 steroid users were using 17 alpha-alkylated steroids, and we do not know what the dosages that were used., but common sense tells us the results are likely relevant.

Last but not least, a simple study done in 1996, showed the long term benefits after taking a 3 month break from steroids[7]. 16 bodybuilders using steroids were compared to 12 bodybuilders that were not. After a three-month drug withdrawal, the researchers showed that levels of liver enzymes, types not mentioned, returned to the same as the non users. Again the dosages are left to the reader’s imagination and we can only guess that the 16 steroid users were using 17 alpha-alkylated steroids.

So what can we conclude from all of this? First off, 17 alpha-alkylated steroids are hepatotoxic in high dosages taken for a long time. On the other hand, short cycles and small dosages appear to be perfectly safe. I suggest that maximum dosages should be 500mg to 900mg per day. They should be cycled for perhaps 8 weeks at a time, and if needed a 3-month break from them should be used. Using the above-mentioned techniques, your liver can be healthy for a long time. Simply put, the hysteria surrounding “hepatoxic” steroids, is based mainly on folk lore.


References:

[1] Lancet 1979 Nov 24;2(8152):1120-3, Hepatic angiosarcoma associated with androgenic-anabolic steroids. Falk H, Thomas LB, Popper H, Ishak KG.

[2] J Gastroenterol 2000;35(7):557-62, Multiple hepatic adenomas caused by long-term administration of androgenic steroids for aplastic anemia in association with familial adenomatous polyposis. Nakao A, Sakagami K, Nakata Y, Komazawa K, Amimoto T, Nakashima K, Isozaki H, Takakura N, Tanaka N.

[3] J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods 1995 Aug;33(4):187-95, Toxic effects of anabolic-androgenic steroids in primary rat hepatic cell cultures. Welder AA, Robertson JW, Melchert RB.

[4] Arch Toxicol 1999 Nov;73(8-9):465-72, Evaluation of acute and chronic hepatotoxic effects exerted by anabolic-androgenic steroid stanozolol in adult male rats. Boada LD, Zumbado M, Torres S, Lopez A, Diaz-Chico BN, Cabrera JJ, Luzardo OP.

[5] Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1999 Feb;31(2):243-50, Rat liver lysosomal and mitochondrial activities are modified by anabolic-androgenic steroids. Molano F, Saborido A, Delgado J, Moran M, Megias A.

[6] Clin J Sport Med 1999 Jan;9(1):34-9, Anabolic steroid-induced hepatotoxicity: is it overstated? Dickerman RD, Pertusi RM, Zachariah NY, Dufour DR, McConathy WJ.

[7] Int J Sports Med 1996 Aug;17(6):429-33, Body composition, cardiovascular risk factors and liver function in long-term androgenic-anabolic steroids using bodybuilders three months after drug withdrawal. Hartgens F, Kuipers H, Wijnen JA, Keizer HA.
 
17aa steroids are toxic to the liver but I agree that the risks associated with their use is exaggerated.
 
Where's all the liver toxicity experts. I'd love to hear from them.
 
Diabolical said:
After reading that I have decided to run a 20 week cycle of dbol at 50 mg. ed

J/K bros.:p

Interesting read JA


I did that. I ran 5 months of dbol at that dose, then took a week off, then went back on it (I took a week off because I'd planned on coming off the dbol due to testing issues, but that turned out to be a non-issue, so I went back on).


I'm no expert, but due to my own experience, liver toxicity does seem at least a little exagerrated.
 
I'd agree, when it comes to most orals seems like your lipid profile is the main concern, not liver toxicity.
 
McBane said:
I'd agree, when it comes to most orals seems like your lipid profile is the main concern, not liver toxicity.

That is very true but most people don't realize the difference.
 
slobberknocker said:



I did that. I ran 5 months of dbol at that dose, then took a week off, then went back on it (I took a week off because I'd planned on coming off the dbol due to testing issues, but that turned out to be a non-issue, so I went back on).


I'm no expert, but due to my own experience, liver toxicity does seem at least a little exagerrated.


Was that hard on your body at all.
If not, then you are living proof that orals arent as bad as everyone thinks.

I dont know about that 20 weeker I was kidding around about.

But I think I might go 30mg. for 12 weeks on my next go around.
With lots of protection just in case.


I hope newbies dont read this and not take their protection, with their dbol.
 
For those that think 20 week cycles of dbol are a good idea keep in mind that side effects do not always manifest themselves quickly and you may have health problems later in life. Personally I would rather ere on the side of caution and keep my 17aa consumption to 8 weeks or less.
 
amen... Karma for you... Finally someone with the same opinion as me...

I also saw a few studies a while back where some aids patients were given 500mg of oxymethelone a day for 17 weeks with no adverse effects...
 
JUICE AUTHORITY...

first, thank you for that. it was informing and easy to read.

second, i respect your knowledge and consider you a major contributor to this post has me guessing.

next, i'm not quite convinced that an extended use of 17-aa compounds is relatively as safe as you claim, but then again i am no expert on the topic. it seems that every profile on methyltest, oxymetholone, and flouxymesterone clearly state that use should be limited to no more than 4-6 weeks.

so where ARE these figures coming from?

have bodybuilders been misinformed for the last 40 years?

i mean, do you see my point? its difficult to digest your article. just doesnt seem right. sure, the few studies that you referred to prove otherwise but i'm pretty sure that if dug up you will find hundreds of studies that would prove your theory wrong.

i'm confused, but aint taking chances with my health or my liverl
i'll stick with 2-4 weeks at a time.
 
Last edited:
satchboogie said:
so where ARE these figures coming from?

have bodybuilders been misinformed for the last 40 years?

i mean, do you see my point? its difficult to digest your article. just doesnt seem right. sure, the few studies that you referred to prove otherwise but i'm pretty sure that if dug up you will find hundreds of studies that would prove your theory wrong.


First, the article is not just someone's opinion, it is grounded in fact with plenty of references to actual studies. The BS on most drug profiles is very general and misleading and most don't bother to research things beyond that. I don't put a lot of faith in the information given on drug profiles. If you're interesting in where I got the information below is a link.

http://magazine.mindandmuscle.net/magmain.php?issueID=8&pageID=84
 
JA ... alot of the problem I have on running several orals at the same time, is a possible receptor conflict... using one oral and one inject usually works great with me... when I get into several orals at the same time... I find... the effect isn't as strong PER oral as if I had only used one... if that makes sense...

C-ditty
 
If even a quarter of the guys on here regularly got bloodwork before/during/after cycle, we would have much better tangible evidence to know the truth behind this issue. I'm not saying I do it myself though, but I know I should.

I know I've seen plenty of posts on here about guys who only had slightly elevated liver values during and after AAS use. I don't recall seeing a single post about someone seeing their liver values at dangerous levels. I'm not saying there haven't been any posts of this nature, but I don't think I've ever seen one myself. On the other hand I can recall that one thread about kidney failure and many posts about terrible lipid profiles.
 
McBane said:
I'd agree, when it comes to most orals seems like your lipid profile is the main concern, not liver toxicity.

I question how much of an issue lipid profiles are. I've gone into this in the past so I won't do it now, however, inflammation, oxidation and fibrin are the real "big-hitters" with heart disease and can all be controlled with supplements such as nattokinase, samento, serrapeptase, vitamin c, l-lysine and garlic. There's a few others but this sure is a good start. The bottom line is that you CAN protect yourself.
 
From personal experience, it is my opinion that the supposed hazards of longterm steroid use, in general, are overstated. I have used gear of all sorts since the 1970's including plenty of 17aa's. My yearly bloodwork results have always been fine, still have all my hair, and never any gyno.
Sure, you have to use some common sense and take ample time off...... it's only the fools who kill themselves with gear (and most of those guys use tons of other "drugs" as well.)
 
i have been saying this for years. i just dont understand the people that say "only run adrol for four weeks" or "dont run dbol longer than six". good post juice.
foo
 
So, orals aren't REALLY that bad, huh? I'd still throw caution to the wind and use ALA and Milk Thistle, but that's just me. If you felt the need to use Orals in conjunction with your injectables for a full cycle. Why not use them in 4-5 week intervals throughout? Just a thought...
 
40butpumpin said:


I question how much of an issue lipid profiles are. I've gone into this in the past so I won't do it now, however, inflammation, oxidation and fibrin are the real "big-hitters" with heart disease and can all be controlled with supplements such as nattokinase, samento, serrapeptase, vitamin c, l-lysine and garlic. There's a few others but this sure is a good start. The bottom line is that you CAN protect yourself.
Hm, I've never really done much research into protecting your lipid profile, wasn't aware there were methods that were that effect (I know there are some prescription meds but usually those have their probs too), besides cardio and lots of EFA's. If you'd care to share with us dosages and supplements you would recommend I'd be very interested in checking them out, as it's my main concern with steroid usage, and should be for most. Also if you got any studies in regards to the supps you listed helping protect lipid profile throw them up, if not, no biggy, just state your opinion on what protocol you would take to protect it and I can do a little searching myself :) Of course any studies I can find to help corroborate what you say I'll share
 
Citruscide said:
JA ... alot of the problem I have on running several orals at the same time, is a possible receptor conflict... using one oral and one inject usually works great with me... when I get into several orals at the same time... I find... the effect isn't as strong PER oral as if I had only used one... if that makes sense...

C-ditty


No such thing.
 
McBane said:

Hm, I've never really done much research into protecting your lipid profile, wasn't aware there were methods that were that effect (I know there are some prescription meds but usually those have their probs too), besides cardio and lots of EFA's. If you'd care to share with us dosages and supplements you would recommend I'd be very interested in checking them out, as it's my main concern with steroid usage, and should be for most. Also if you got any studies in regards to the supps you listed helping protect lipid profile throw them up, if not, no biggy, just state your opinion on what protocol you would take to protect it and I can do a little searching myself :) Of course any studies I can find to help corroborate what you say I'll share
bump for 40butpumpin:fro:
 
Flax oils, fish oils, garlic extract, red rice yeast extract (very effective), and so forth. There are some other nice ones, and I have a feeling that NAC would be beneficial here, too. Also, take a high-dose B-complex.
 
Baoh said:
Flax oils, fish oils, garlic extract, red rice yeast extract (very effective), and so forth. There are some other nice ones, and I have a feeling that NAC would be beneficial here, too. Also, take a high-dose B-complex.
Found good stuff basically on olive oil, fish oil, flax seed oil, garlic, vitamin A, C, E, and hypothetically alphalipoic acid (as it increases effectiveness of C&E vitamins), and selenium but couldn't find anything about red rice yeast extract. Is there a different name for it, or is there something in it that is responsible for the effect?

Found good stuff on niacin too which comes as no surprise, but was reading a little bit about its negative effect on liver, couldn't really determine to what degree though.
 
McBane said:

Found good stuff basically on olive oil, fish oil, flax seed oil, garlic, vitamin A, C, E, and hypothetically alphalipoic acid (as it increases effectiveness of C&E vitamins), and selenium but couldn't find anything about red rice yeast extract. Is there a different name for it, or is there something in it that is responsible for the effect?

Found good stuff on niacin too which comes as no surprise, but was reading a little bit about its negative effect on liver, couldn't really determine to what degree though.

It promotes HMG-CoA reductase inhibition action. If I remember correctly, it's a statin of some kind. I forget which one exactly, though. A search of Pubmed may help you out.
 
Baoh said:


It promotes HMG-CoA reductase inhibition action. If I remember correctly, it's a statin of some kind. I forget which one exactly, though. A search of Pubmed may help you out.
yeah i tried searching with no luck :) I did see studies in regards to HMG-CoA reductase inhibition action though
 
Hey JA ... good read. A lot of anecdotal info, but still good. I agree with many others ,... if not abused (by this I mean crazy dosages, and long periods of time), you will be fine.

Citrucide ... I would never use 2 orals at a time ... unless you used them at half there dosages to equal the same dosage of 1 of them

An oral with injectible(s) works great.

I think that Anadrol, on the other hand is the worst for your liver. I have never done it, and never will. It is not made in 5mg tabs like dbol, because it has a terrible affinity for receptor sites so it's made into a 50 mg tablet, which inflicts considerable stress to your liver.

If you know that you are going to be putting your liver through a bit of stress ... why not help it out a little. I always use liver protectants with an oral. Cant wait for a few more weeks .... the boys at the anabolic fitness shop are creating a tylers liver detox formula that will make it into Canada!!!! We need something like this instead of buying everything separetely/

Mavy
 
Great post enjoyed it alot -- I always felt 6-8 wks of dbol at 20-30 (with an inj.) was ok for me, it's good to think maybe it's not really so bad as all the negative press to run orals more than 4wks.
 
So what can we conclude from all of this? First off, 17 alpha-alkylated steroids are hepatotoxic in high dosages taken for a long time. On the other hand, short cycles and small dosages appear to be perfectly safe. I suggest that maximum dosages should be 500mg to 900mg per day. They should be cycled for perhaps 8 weeks at a time, and if needed a 3-month break from them should be used. Using the above-mentioned techniques, your liver can be healthy for a long time. Simply put, the hysteria surrounding “hepatoxic” steroids, is based mainly on folk lore.


500mg to 900mg a day?
 
ironmaster said:
From personal experience, it is my opinion that the supposed hazards of longterm steroid use, in general, are overstated. I have used gear of all sorts since the 1970's including plenty of 17aa's. My yearly bloodwork results have always been fine, still have all my hair, and never any gyno.
Sure, you have to use some common sense and take ample time off...... it's only the fools who kill themselves with gear (and most of those guys use tons of other "drugs" as well.)

Thank you for that post,I agree yrs ago i ran mostly dbol for 6 months at a time with no problems this was when i was in my 30's back then there was no "internet" no anti e 's,no knowledge about liver protectors,never had a problem,......But!!!!!! The dosage was 5mg EOD 1'st wk,5mg ed 2nd wk. 10mg3rd wk i never went over 10 mgs but back then those german 5mg dbol packed a hard punch!

RADAR
 
So what can we conclude from all of this? First off, 17 alpha-alkylated steroids are hepatotoxic in high dosages taken for a long time. On the other hand, short cycles and small dosages appear to be perfectly safe. I suggest that maximum dosages should be 500mg to 900mg per day. They should be cycled for perhaps 8 weeks at a time, and if needed a 3-month break from them should be used. Using the above-mentioned techniques, your liver can be healthy for a long time. Simply put, the hysteria surrounding “hepatoxic” steroids, is based mainly on folk lore.


JA you need to edit your post, I'm sure that you meant 50 to 90mg of orals per day. Otherwise a truly great read, recently I completed a six month cycle of anavar and various injectables at moderate doses, for the last four weeks I added halo at 15 to 20mg per day (contest prep). Four weeks post cycle I had complete blood work done blood lipids were great, liver enzymes only slightly elevated but within normal parameters. So much about the harmfull effects are bullshit based not research based.

Please post this at IT:)
 
Red yeast rice actually contains eight identified compounds with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitory activity (including lovastatin and its active metabolite). So yes, good stuff, but bad cuz unless you know the exact concentration or standardization of the supplement you are buying, you have no idea how much benefit/harm you are getting.
For JA's post, I think it raises the very important point of how critical it is to be able to interpret the findings of studies. When reading a study, one must consider what type of study was actually done. By this, I mean was it a randomized-controlled study? Were the subjects, investigators blinded? RCT's generally are considered the "gold standard" by which we gauge studies. But they may not always be appropriate. Other study types include: Cohort, Case-controls, cross-sectional and case-reports (among others). They each have their role in scientific applications. But most importantly is for the reader to be able to assess the validity of the study being presented "Do the reported outcomes represent the true direction and magnitude of the effects?" When reading a study, always ask yourself if the patients/subjects they were studying actually represent the true population (you and me). Always consider what kinds of bias (anything that erroneously influences conclusions about the groups under investigation and distorts the comparisons) that may be present in the study that can influence results. Bias comes in many forms and it is not always easy to detect. Ask yourself if there were things about the subjects being studied that could have affected the end result or outcome (did the subjects already have an underlying complication, or were subjects selected from a non-representful group of the population, was the sample size adequate, etc?) Consider how subjects were recruited for the study. Many times subjects are selected based on certain inclusion and exclusion criteria. Many times, studies are done on healthy, young individuals (or even the opposite is found). Consider the time period which the study was conducted. Do you feel the time was adequate enough to produce a noticible effect? Most importantly, read the methods part of the study. This is where you will find the information you need to be able to decide if the study is valid or not. Most people just read the abstract, or read the intro and skip to the conclusion/discussion. This is bad because most authors will want their study to shine. By not reading the methods section, you are missing out on the "meat" of the study. It is in here where you will be able to find potential biases that exist which may decrease validity of the study. Always read the study with an open mind, and always ask yourself "so what"?. Consider what may have happened if the investigators did things differently.
My point is to try and get people to really "read" the study and not just the abstract or conclusion section. Always consider the true validity of the study. Can the results be extrapolated you and me! You need to make your own decision about the study. Remember that so many variables/bias exist which can ultimately affect the true validity of the study. Just because the study was done in a certain group of people does not mean it can be generalized to the true population. Read with an open mind, but consider why the investigators chose to do the things they did. You can learn more on interpreting scientific lit. by doing a general search on the internet. Or, for those who have access to full articles by pubmed/medline I will post some excellent reports that will help you in understanding the med lit.

Karma for JA, because he posted some very interesting studies that everyone should try and access if you can. Read them, and make your own conclusion from them. Don't take the authors word for the results that were found. Some places that you may find full access to free articles are:
bmj.com
http://www.lib.uiowa.edu/hardin/md/ej.html
http://www.gfmer.ch/Medical_journals/Free_medical_links.htm
http://www.lcls.lib.il.us/ste/ejournals.htm
http://www.coreynahman.com/medical_journals.html
http://www.freemedicaljournals.com
and nejm.com offers free journals after a certain time period (requires free registration)
 
what you guys are missing is the liver is extremely resilient. but push it too many times and it just fails.
 
I recently learned that my friend once stayed on dbol for 3 years non stop in the 70's.
 
doesnt Fonz reccommend gugguls, green tea extract, and tamoxifen for lipid profiles? (garlic too , but thats been metioned)
 
I questiion how much of an issue lipid profiles are.

I believe they are of great concern. I had blood work done while on a test + Dbol cycle at 30mg Dbol, and my HDL levels were practically non-existant. Dbol completely wiped out my HDL choleserol.

For those of you who don't know, it's your HDL ("good chosterol") that is responsible for disposing of surpluss cholesterol in the blood stream. Pretty much all orals will wipe out your HDL levels for months, leaving your body open for plaque formation and high bloosd pressure, and in the long run, contributing to heart disease and other cardiovascular problems.

So even if this article is correct in the point that liver toxicity is exagerrated, there is still the problem of your lipid profiles. If it's not one thing, it's another. Just be safe, and stick to the normal cycle guidlines that have been used for years. Don't use one article as an excuse to through years of experience out the window.
 
Last edited:
that's a great read.

i don't have a lot of experience but i've never understood why so much is made of the potential for liver damage with 17-a orals. alcohol and rec drugs are probably much worse, especially given the fact that abusers of these drugs rarely cycle them. how long does it take an alcoholic to destroy a liver? decades, provided he had a healthy one to start with.
 
This is an interesting thread as I also feel that for the most part, a lot of side effects of AAS are over rated by far with the exception of horrible blood lipid profiles and a few other things as well.

Here is an excerpt right out of my copy of the 2003 Physicians Desktop Reference (PDR) regarding Anadrol 50:

OVERDOSAGE
There have been no reports of acute overdosage with anabolics.


DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION
The recommended daily dose in children and adults is 1-5 mg/kg body weight per day. The usual effective dose is 1-2 mg/kg/day but higher doses may be required, and the dose should be individualized. Response is not often immediate, and a minimum trial of three to six months should be given. Following remission, some patients may be maintained without the drug; others may be maintained on an established lower daily dosage. A continued maintenance dose is usually necessary in patients with congenital aplastic anemia.
One would assume that safety studies were done for FDA approval. I find the dosages amazingly high--higher than what a lot of bodybuilders would ever take. Consider that if you weigh 220 lbs, that equals 100 KG. At the minimun recommended dose of 1 mg/kg/day that would be 100mg of Anadrol 50 per day or 2 tablets per day. 2mg/kg/day would be 200 mg per day. And at the high end of 5 mg/kg/day, that would mean 500mg/day. Doesn't this seem like an awfully high dose? Does anyone know of anyone that has done this much? The lower doses of 1-2mg/kg/day are approved for long term use of a minimum of three to six months or longer, possibly permanently, depending on the expression of undesirable side effects.

I also know a physician that was involved in the safety studies of Anadrol with AIDS patients. He had a patient die within one week of starting him on Anadrol 50 from blood filled cysts in the liver (peliosis hepatis) so consequently he is not so keen on the drug and feels it CAN be dangerous. However, the dosage, I believe was 150 mg/day and you have to remember that AIDS patients are typically on MANY liver toxic medications at the same time so this would only compound any toxicity from the Anadrol 50. Also the patient alledgely was in very poor condition but volunteered for the study and had severe HIV related cachexia (wasting of lean body mass). So the death could not be causally linked necessarily to the Anadrol 50 for the study purposes and was discounted. I heard of one other patient on the same study that also died from the same reason and was also discounted for the same reason. So it is hard to definitively say whether the Anadrol caused it or if it was the straw that broke the camel's back in light of all of what else was going on. But it does serve as a word of caution for people that do not have healthy livers or are on liver toxic medications or are in seriously ill condition.
 
I wonder which is harder on the kidneys. An oral, or 500 grams of protein.
 
Animal used to say...

that he couldn't find ONE study that said that excessive protein consumption was hard on the kidneys. I don't know though - anyone else.

Strenthfiend
 
That doesn't mean anything. Have there been any studies to prove the contrary?
 
KOArtist said:
doesnt Fonz reccommend gugguls, green tea extract, and tamoxifen for lipid profiles? (garlic too , but thats been metioned)

Here's Fonz's lipid profile cocktail:

I'll also be taking this to help with the shewed lipid profile post-cycle...

Guggulsterones: 180mg/day
Policosanol: 40mg/day
Green Tea(45% ECGCG): 1g/day
Tocotreniols: 1g/day(A way more potent form of Vitamin E)
Garlic(Kyolic): 1g/day
(Novaldex: 20mg/day)
 
Juice Authority said:


Here's Fonz's lipid profile cocktail:

I'll also be taking this to help with the shewed lipid profile post-cycle...

Guggulsterones: 180mg/day
Policosanol: 40mg/day
Green Tea(45% ECGCG): 1g/day
Tocotreniols: 1g/day(A way more potent form of Vitamin E)
Garlic(Kyolic): 1g/day
(Novaldex: 20mg/day)

Thats for cholesterol...and to a smaller degree lipids.

Fonz
 
I never have lipid problems, I use cla 3gms 3 X a day and Efa's 3gms when I wake up and 3 gms before bed. When I do orals I add 6 gms gla as well.
 
liftsiron said:
I never have lipid problems, I use cla 3gms 3 X a day and Efa's 3gms when I wake up and 3 gms before bed. When I do orals I add 6 gms gla as well.

People don't experience lipid problems unless they are very fat 15+BF% or more.
Cholesterol is a different story.

Fonz
 
When doing lab tests cholesterol is considered one of the "lipids".

My bf% is a 10% and doing a cycle significantly alters my lipid levels, even when no orals are used.

By the way nice abs, Fonzie.
 
Generic MALE said:
When doing lab tests cholesterol is considered one of the "lipids".

My bf% is a 10% and doing a cycle significantly alters my lipid levels, even when no orals are used.

By the way nice abs, Fonzie.

Thanks.

Fonz
 
Top Bottom