Comments On Dangers

Pharma
21

the AMA & new england medical association (if i recall the name correctly) both DID NOT support the government’s upgrade of steroid to a high-class restricted substance.

one might ponder why.

there are NO official studies of long term use of steroids to support how “horribly they tear down the athlete”

one might find that interesting.

muscle turning to fat.

physiologically that is impossible.

science is a non-biased approach to learning why things are…etc etc.

i suggest taking that approach before continuing to come off like an uninformed *^)%$

22

[quote]codemiester wrote:
Im not sure if this was a new tlc program but i just wanted to here what people thought about the “The Man Who’s Arms Exploded” program. They talked about how after the first drop of a steriod enters your body it gets on/in every cell and over a long period of time will cause the arteries to harden or tumors. I think it sounded kind of extreme and exagerated.[/quote]

codemiester it is good you are looking out for your health.

You have to realise a few things though and learn from this … not all “credible” sources are correct. There is a lot of dogma out there even in scientific circles. And the media just plain LIES to you, for whatever agenda.

That show was LYING. That guy had huge arms from injecting oil into his muscles, like pumping up a balloon with air, he pumped them up with oil. The show did not mention that. The show was LYING, so so many examples in the media.

Scientific circles are less obvious but sometimes they just don’t know. And sometimes things are suppressed, I kid you not. If a study showed that taking X illegal drug actually improved your health and had no side effects, that study would be suppressed. Apart from that, sometimes scientists simply do not know what the longterm effects will be, and are speculating.

If you are going to be a scientist you must realise all of the above, keep questioning and look for observable evidence.

As for steroids, it would all come down to moderation. Very beneficial for some, especially the elderly. If you do not want to use them, you do not have to.

23

[quote]Il Don wrote:
I’m not here to make any enemies, but if you’re planning on winning an arguement against me yoou’d better have some clear-cut facts backing you up. I just did a little search on the net and found these articles randomly (to grant you easier access to some of what I go by in my reasoning). I’ll give you the benefit of understanding that most of the “common-sense” of steroid effects are just a collection of blindly followed facts and opinions, but take a look at some of these CREDIBLE sources:
[edit]
Just take a look at the sources.[/quote]

Actually, they are ignorant and not well backed. I looked at your links and here is what I got from them at first glance.

The first just gives a bunch of possible side effects. No evidence is offered or studies cited but who needs that when you have “steroid truth”.

The second link just sends you to a review of an article. Not the paper, just the proposal. Whether the argument is conclusive remains to be seen. Now wouldn’t you say a person is a tad ignorant for taking for what is essentially a thesis statment and holding it up as scientific proof?

And the last link doesn’t really prove anything. Just sort of shows some results which are open to interpretation. One of which is…"Moreover, intramuscular administration of nandrolone decanoate (200 mg a week) for eight weeks did not have any effect on serum concentrations of triglycerides, total cholesterol, HDL-C, HDL2-C, and HDL3-C, although a trend to decreased Lp(a) concentration was found. This may beneficially affect the risk of cardiovascular events.

The effects on serum lipids and lipoproteins were not influenced by the duration of self administration of AASs. However, recovery of the altered serum concentrations of lipids and lipoproteins to baseline values was prolonged in long term (14 weeks) AAS users compared with short term (eight weeks) users. The increased risk of premature disease was therefore prolonged, although the prolonged decrease in serum Lp(a) concentrations may beneficially influence vascular prognosis." Now correct me if I’m wrong but I think it just says it takes longer to recover and there is an increased risk of premature disease(in prolonged use) but does mention “a trend to decreased Lp(a) concentration was found. This may beneficially affect the risk of cardiovascular events.” Kinda goes against one of those “steroid truths” you mentioned.

Anyway, I think most of the “you are ignorant” comments came from you saying you are in school for this area yet somehow think muscle turns to fat.

24

For most people on this forum this topic can get more heated than any abortion debate because it affects us personally. First, to all the anti-steroid “scholars” you read information written by biased individuals who have their own agenda. Certain steroids have different side effects and have different purposes. Saying that USE not abuse will cause adverse effects is like saying marijuana and heroin will have the same side effects. IGNORANT.
I could go on and on but truthfully whats the point. People are stupid and lazy and sadly believe everything they see on CNN. It’s a damn shame to see so many mindless idiots being fed absolute crap and believe it as God’s gospel.

25

[quote]Il Don wrote:
I’m not here to make any enemies, but if you’re planning on winning an arguement against me yoou’d better have some clear-cut facts backing you up. I just did a little search on the net and found these articles randomly (to grant you easier access to some of what I go by in my reasoning). I’ll give you the benefit of understanding that most of the “common-sense” of steroid effects are just a collection of blindly followed facts and opinions, but take a look at some of these CREDIBLE sources:

All you?ve gotta do is read the first paragraph in this one:

Pay close attention to what some of these articles, including this one, say about LDL levels:
http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/151/10/1925

Again, I don’t want to sound like an anti-steroid columnist, but I hate when people try to tell me that my ideas are ignorant/not well-backed. They are. I also apologize to the creator of this thread because I understand this wasn’t the kind of discussion he had in mind when creating it. Just take a look at the sources.[/quote]

Wow you can use the internet. Congrats, you have the research skills of an elementary school student. Here are some counter points to your websites:

http://www.mesomorphosis.com/articles/collins/wrong-prescription.htm

27

[quote]MODOK wrote:
Well, this is a topic I think, as a PharmD, I can speak on and sound like I know a little something. Of course steroids have a side effect profile. Every legend drug that I know of does. Its true, in some cases, oral steroids can lower HDL, increase LDL, increase liver enzymes, cause jaundice, on and on.

Steroids in themselves also may cause atheriosclerosis if used long term, but this isn’t an effect of exogenous steroid use as much as it would be high levels of testosterone. High test. may possibly contribute to heart disease, we just don’t know that yet, as there aren’t any long term, clinical studies with conclusive proof. Other factors could be at play.

So, of course there are side effects; I don’t think anyone here is claiming that there is not. Its a pharmaceutical for God’s sake. What we are upset about is the unfair treatment this drug gets within the media itself. It does have side effects, but the side effect profile of androgen is very low compared to most other pharmaceutics, and it certainly does not warrant the demonization it gets. Many of the drugs in everyday life are FAR more toxic.

If you swallow a bottle of asprin, tylenol, and dianabol, which one WON’T kill you? Of course the steroid. Statins have horrible side effect profiles, and I guarantee contribute to 30 times more deaths than steroids do. Anti-hypertensives, tri-cyclic anti-depressents, oral hyperglycemics…all will kill and have much worse side effect profiles. Heck, you know that bottle of Afrin for your spring allergies, drink it and you’ll be a gonner if you don’t get right to the hospital…guaranteed.

Why villify steroids? They shouldn’t be scheduled. Hell, they should be viewed as their sibling, estrogen is. Both have about the same chance of causing you harm. Noone here takes steroids lightly; but we recognize them for what they are; very useful, safe, pharmaceuticals. Nothing less,nothing more.

And if you choose to use them, you shouldn’t be looked at as a pariya (sp?)[/quote]

Thank you! That’s all I was looking for in the first place, a nice solid refutable statement for the negative side effects. I never said I think all steroid users share needles and all that other bullcrap. Also, what I meant by saying muscle “turns into” fat is that when you age you will ultimately loose the muscle. That’s undeniable if you plan on living a long life, isn’t it? I don’t care if someone uses steroids, granted it’s not for me. Still there are peole who misuse them. I was only trying to give the post creator a more broad view of the effects.