I have a feeling @unreal24278 is about to unload some AAS related cardiac studies on that ass.
1 Like
Blast dose and dosage requested for opinion for discussion only not for personal interest
I’ve made clear now on well enough occasions that I am lowering my dose permanently until I have had necessary health screening and even then at least 4-6 months for recovery
The way I read that statement is that one person could take X dose for Y amount of time and get Z impact to the heart. Person 2 could take X dose for Y amount of time and get 3Z impact to the heart. Same goes for booze. Some drink 10 beers a day and never have any heart issues, others are not so lucky.
It is possible I am misinterpreting the study. That particular paragraph is a bit of a word salad.
I personally would not go above 250 mg/wk for a cruise. Blast I will certainly stay below a gram a week (but will likely run a gram at some point). I am thinking the time on = time off is a bit aggressive for my liking. I will probably go twice the time off as on. But I am a careful person (my first blast was 325 mg/wk with 50 mg var a day for the last six weeks). I realized I did not get a ton out of that blast. I plan on running 5-600 mg a week for the next blast.
Same goes for cigarettes. My grandfather that never smoked died of esophagus cancer at 55. My other grandfather smoked reds for 60 years, was an executive at Marlboro for 50 years and died at 93 years old because a surgeon made a mistake during a routine surgery.
Hopefully you get mostly the genetics of your smoking grandpa.
Key words: cumulative, partially, unpredictably.
Cardiotoxicity appears transient in some people, as in it goes away after a while if you lower your dose. They didn’t, and likely won’t, find a concrete link to cumulative lifetime dose and damage. It’s immoral to run that as a controlled experiment so they can’t get funding for it. I am sure there would be volunteers and scientists willing to do it, but no one is going to fund it. You have dose related issues right now. Hopefully they go away at a reasonable cruise dose and are not permanent. But maybe they are permanent. Only time will tell.
1 Like
I can upload like 5-10 studies, though one can also find studies indicating AAS doesn’t deleteriously alter cardiac structure. Though it’s like a 10-1 ratio when considering high dosages (like this guy is using)
Some studies indicate the effect is sub-clinical, others indicate the effect is so significant long term users are literally ticking time bombs. It’s largely genetic (I presume) given the wide variability of response regarding cardiac function/output within the user cohorts.
Furthermore according to case reports as @hardartery stated… at times the cardiotoxicity might stem from extensive use over a long period of time, be reversible after discontinuation. Though at this point if the heart has been enlarged for long enough, apoptotic mechanisms have been initiated… dead cells will be replaced with fibrous tissue, even if cardiac size/function reverts to normal (which it doesn’t always)… this fibrous tissue predisposes one to lethal arrythmias.
Body of evidence stating perhaps it’s not that bad
Body of evidence suggesting perhaps some effects stemming from past use are irreversible
https://www.ajconline.org/article/S0002-9149(05)02117-X/fulltext
The study of which the dude quoted… it appears he selectively found the one quote which stated “perhaps it’s not the AAS”
Subclinical dysfunction
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/circulationaha.116.026945
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circheartfailure.109.931063
(within this dosage the mean dose used is only 675mg weekly)
Serious dysfunction
Limitations within these studies exist
- participants lying about use/not being honest about dosing
- Compounds aren’t differentiated upon, there’s a big difference between primo and tren etc
- correlation and causation are two very different things… though we have enough data on purported mechanisms of cardiac damage, enough case reports to stipulate at the VERY LEAST those susceptible to deleterious change may be predisposed to developing cardiomyopathy and/or dropping dead.
I can link further studies, extrapolate upon mechanisms, discuss potential ways to minimise harm… but there’s a reason why instead of “cycling” I use like 225mg year round, add in an oral/something very mild like taking a shot of mast every now and then as opposed to cycling. We don’t know what dose equates to what level of detriment. For those who wish to cycle, that’s great and I harbour no judgement… but for me, I’d prefer to EER on the side of caution. A side that still allows me too use enough to have a great quality of life… but also minimise potential risks.
There is very little rationale with arguing at this point that running 1200mg year round won’t induce complications
I’ll continually be linking more studies throughout the day lol
Furthermore, I’ll be talking about AAS induced neurotoxicity when I have the available time
Both my grandfathers and grandmas smoked
Both grandpas died (65 or so and 48). One from a stroke due to untreated high blood pressure, another from a smoking related illness
Both grandmas are still alive (85 and 95)… the 95 y/o one smoked heavily for around 40 years. Supposedly (according to my uploaded genetic data) I harbour the genes of one that has a very high likelihood of living til over 85… hope they find a non addictive cure for pain lol… at 50, let alone 80 I imagine my life will be very difficult. I have a (blood related) family member who lived til over 100
Of all these studies, of which many contradict eachother with there being so many variables which are in need of balancing in order to generate an outcome that could be deemed universal… there is however one thing that’s popping up regularly and I can conclude this as universal: this is a case by case issue and everyone is different. Heart disease unfortunately is also the leading killer of all humanity and has been for some time, which is more than a spanner in the works as some say. I think bro science really has it’s place on these subjects … I really do. And blood work and regular check ups are paramount… 1200 a week for the last 8 months has been a no no and I put that down to a combination of being driven and /or showing signs of addictive nature for the benefits whilst brushing health under the carpet. I’ve since changed my tune and always knew it wasn’t any where near sustainable anyway … I’ve now engaged in some serious reading up and have now seen a doctor who was uber supportive and wants to help. I’ve got tests coming up and I’m down to an agreed 200 a week whilst my body comes back into homeostasis. Starting to feel better already… ps I didn’t “pluck out” the only quote from
The study in any other way other than that it was the most conclusive statement made in the document. Everything else was not as definitive. It was the most crunching conclusion made : there’s no link made in the study whatsoever. Basically
If you’re not great with word salads, you can be fooled By the opening headings and provisional statements Made in those papers … but I read it through word for word and I have this thing for word salads … I can read through and decipher the stand out points without being sidetracked by intellectual and or clinical waffle. So unfortunately for you perhaps I just read the document rather than assuming your superiority as the leading t-nation authority on cardiovascular health? Possibly.
Uhhhh… yes there is… the variable of AAS use, independent of coadministered drug use was found to be strongly correlated with a significant deterioration in cardiac function… within the box plot, some below Q1 had LVEF’s low enough for one to diagnose CHF… Though this was perhaps related to compounding factors (it was mentioned some members had a dependence on cocaine if I recall correctly)
Though when drug use aside from AAS was factored out, there was still a statistically significant decline in cardiac function, increase in left ventricular mass (comparative to exercise alone etc)
it’s like me saying “despite many known mechanisms being present, the correlation between long term use of cocaine and a deterioration in cardiac function is just that… a correlation”
get lost mate… I’m not purporting myself to be an expert on anything, it’s a fairly well accepted fact that AAS use will induce some level of cardiac deterioration at this point. There are MANY potential mechanisms at play here
- high blood pressure secondary to induced systemic vascular resistance (Aldosterone dysregulation/RAAS modulation)
- beta adrenergic receptor upregulation
- direct effect (AR binding in cardiac myocytes)
- oxidative stress
and more
You can believe whatever bullshit you wish to believe in order to justify you’re own self destructive habits… I’m sure you’ll drop down to 200mg weekly for a while… then blast like 500mg test, 700mg tren, 100mg dbol for another year under the pretence of “perhaps it’s not bad for you”… You remind me of weightliftingwithoutlimits, the “I disagree that Boston Lloyd won’t live a long life” guy
I wish you luck and I wish you a long/healthy life. There are ways to dramatically mitigate risk, and staying on thousands of milligrams forever isn’t one of them.
2 Likes
For a seemingly educated chap it’s come as quite a shock that you’ve so stupidly attempted to frame my position as “trying to justify my destructive habits” when I’m fact I’ve been completely accepting of my issue all along… made it quite clear I was in trouble
from the offset and have frequently put it, in English, to the forum that I need help. What I don’t respect is your condescending nature, self Absorbed assumption you are the Clinical
authority here, regularly acting in a derogatory tone and rather than having any genuine helpful intentions, you’ve instead jumped on my issues regularly with malice, choosing to ride my cry for help in some deranged attempt massage your own ego. You’ve got keyboard warrior
Written all over you mate. Obviously you have issues of your own to work on as do all people like
You who come along in the guise of “help”
To a community forum
Where your only true underlying intention is to make yourself feel better by putting assuming vulnerable people down. Didn’t
Wash with me tho. I reckon your probably
More insecure than I am mate; all arrogance is routed with deep insecurity and you’ve got plenty
Of the former so I’ll assume you have plenty of the latter and choose to pity you. This is a place
To help and support others not flex your supposed intellectual superiority in a condescending, derogatory tone with a clear malicious intent. Please. Get off my thread you’re “help” ain’t welcome Thanks
@charlie2019
Dude you need to put a full stop on that shit right now. The guy is trying to help you. He’s 19 years old and very knowledgeable about medical shit that you wouldn’t get from others.
2 Likes
@charlie2019, are you kidding me man? You’re upset because he’s provided you with information regarding your heart health that has you feeling some sort of way. He’s done nothing but tried to help you. Yet for some reason, you don’t want to hear what he’s saying, probably because you don’t want to believe that you may have potentially caused damage to your heart, which I understand. Lashing out at someone trying to help you won’t fix that.
Your attitude, and the way in which you have come across throughout this entire post, certainly come across as a person who more than likely will fall back into old ways and become reckless again with usage. I hope that I am wrong, but unreal is not the only one thinking it. You can say that you have accepted the help and will adhere to suggestions made all you want, the entirety of your posts say something a bit different.
Again, he was trying to help you. No need to be a dick.
I never assumed you were vulnerable, nor do I think you are.
I provided you with data to look through regarding potential cardiac implications. I can link more data regarding the potential mechanisms behind the cardiac pathology AAS may induce if you’d like.
With malice? Not really, stern would be the correct assumption. You’re behaviour reminds me of those who I’ve known who have developed issues with substance abuse… it’s concern, not malice. I’ve found that one needs to make it clear that this kind of behaviour isn’t acceptable. I’ve heard “alright, I’m stopping now, I’ll clean myself up”… this typically lasts a few months before they return to prior habits with new justifications made as to why it’s acceptable to drink heavily on a daily basis… take ketamine every single time you go out etc… I may be wrong, but the fact that you’ve read this one study (which whilst small, has results of which pertain significance regarding you’re situation) and managed to decipher “you can’t PROVE it’s the steroids” makes me think you’re the type to justify habits of which may prove destructive in the long run… this doesn’t just pertain to you… we all do this to some extent, to have denial over the repercussions over a habit that makes us feel good is common. You clearly intend to cycle again when health markers check out, and chances are you aren’t going to dose responsibly for a non competitive athlete either… I have no problem with freedom of choice so long as you’re explicitly aware of the potential ramifications, not in absolute denial.
An example would be me and internet pornography, I look at it daily… I know it isn’t good, I’m aware of the prospect regarding dopaminergic dysregulation, I’m aware it’s probably the reason I don’t get much action (not always all that motivated to do so when I can just masturbate with or without internet pornography… but typically with)… yet I convince myself “ahhh it’s just a healthy habit for someone of my age”… despite the fact that over the years data has been mounting showcasing that it is not… in fact a healthy habit when one looks at it daily.
Not exactly true, there was one study pertaining to competitive powerlifters, the mortality rate was 6x that of the general populace when followed up over time. The vast majority of the deaths were cardiac related. There are many, many, many, many case reports of acute myocardial infarction, cardiomyopathy being present, coronary vasospasm within athletes using AAS… Genetics play a massive role here, tren appears to be quite a large culprit within many of the case reports and some reports state concurring drug use being present (most typically regular usage of cocaine)
But the data in general regarding AAS and cardiac health is mounting up… and it isn’t good. I believe there is a largely genetic element to this. One with a familial history of heart disease who hops on is far more likely to drop than you or I. It’s also dose dependent. If you run cycles heavily for brief spans throughout the year you’ll probably get away with it… for a period of time… if you’re running 1000mg weekly year round that’s a different story (20-30 years down the line).
Another study recently came out following AAS users (generalised, so lets say the dosages are far lower than that used by strongmen, powerlifters and bodybuilders…) mortality rate was 3x higher than the avg populace… about an on par increase in overall mortality comparative to those who smoke cigarettes daily.
Jon Pall Sigmarrson died aged 32… heart attack
Simon Plant (strongman) died 47
Mike Jenkins (cardiomyopathy) age 31
Lee Bowers aged 52
Johnny Perry aged 29… heart failure
Rick Brown 41
O.D Wilson 37 (cardiac arrest)
I can list many, many more. That being said there appears to be proportionately less deaths within strongmen vs powerlifting and bodybuilding. The risk isn’t minuscule or “low” for most. Think about it like this @flipcollar, 100-250mg is the general set point for physiology (perhaps 2% need 250 for the top end of normal)… for me the set point is about 170mg weekly, for most it’s 125-150mg weekly. Do you really think that using dosages equatable to 40-60x what a man should produce (given androgen receptors are present within the brain, heart, liver, kidneys… just about every major organ) would have no serious consequence long term if used frequently?
I’m not trying to be a dick, for those who need super high dosages to compete, go for it… But I believe one should know exactly what the risks are. If you look at some of the studies I’ve recently posted on this forum, you’ll notice that significant cardiac detriment appears to occur after a net 10-15 years on from dosages of 700-1000mg let alone 5000-8000mg… If you’ve never had cardiac imaging done, I’d suggest (not trying to be a dick) getting a cardiac MRI, stress echo or cardiac ultrasound. I’m legitimately willing to bet 40$ you’ll have some degree of cardiac enlargement associated with some degree of diastolic/systolic dysfunction. There are purported mechanisms for the damage, and like all drugs it’s largely genetic… some guys will drop dead after taking one line of coke, others can use for decades (the guys from Motley Crue, Ozzy Ozbourne etc come to mind)… the same goes with AAS… but sooner or later, be it in you’re 50’s, 60’s or 70’s… it catches up to you
I don’t believe the golden era guys were as conservative as we make them out to be, but I do believe they dosed considerably lower (I wouldn’t be suprised if 1000mg weekly was considered a very heavy dose for Frank Zane)… these guys are still alive (well… not all of them, the avg age of death still appears to be about 5-10 years off the avg man… though a lot of people, bodybuilders included would smoke tobacco, these guys also ate pounds of red meat, a ton of saturated fat/cholesterol etc)… the guys reaching freak status (body size is inversely correlated with cardiac mass) are dropping dead earlier. It’s extremely detailed (mechanisms involved, why cardiac size over a certain point… even independently of induced cardiac dysfunction may be of detriment). It’s not something that’s extremely complex, but writing down all the details would be like a 5000 word writeup lol.
Even the smaller guys are sometimes dropping dead in their 20’s 30’s and 40’s… stimulant abuse is incredibly detrimental when combined with excessive exercise, hence the mortality rate amongst pro (endurance) cyclists (these athletes tend to have HUGE hearts) in the anabolic steroid/amphetamine combo era
The guys in the pro circuit aren’t dying because they have the genes to withstand massive dosages of drugs… and even then many drop dead 10-20 years suddenly after their careers end. What you aren’t hearing about are the minor league/amatuer league guys dropping dead (same goes for pro bodybuilding)
Take ADHD medication and me (I have ADHD but refuse to take medication for it)… statistically 5-10mg dexamfetamine induces a HR increase off 3-6BPM… for me this increase is closer to 20-25BPM… it’d be significantly easier for me to fatally overdose (fatal arrythmia/induced cardiomyopathy) following chronic or acute abuse/even supposedly therapeutic use combined with intensive exercise… But genetically with alcohol (this is present within my father and brother) I can slam 15-20 shots back to back… that’s about what it takes to make me drunk despite the fact that I very rarely drink (not delusions of sobriety, I’ve been on video after absurd amounts walking/talking just fine), others will need an ambulance after 6-7… Despite tolerance however (same with AAS) to the acute manifestations, this doesn’t equate to less strain on my organs being present… there’s MORE strain induced due to a higher amount being required (with AAS being able to take a higher amount regardless of requirement)
4 Likes
You’ve contradicted yourself on several different levels there I can’t even give it the time needed… So I’ll just say thanks but no thanks
how? I’m giving both sides of the argument. Stating susceptibility plays a role etc… how am I contradicting myself aside from giving you the whole picture. It’d be ignorant if I just stated the singular “it’ll cause you to drop dead in ten years”… that’d be fear mongering, it’s merely a possibility. I’ve attempted to relate by using my own personal anecdote that I’m self conscious about…
Ok… I’m out of this thread regarding any response to you. I wish you the best, but this isn’t worth either of our time. You can choose to believe what you wish… that AAS don’t induce cardiac pathology… despite the fact that you’re having chest pains, heart palpitations, excessive sweating. It’s very possible, likely even they’re unrelated to cardiac detriment given you’re duration of use… but it’s possible
A guy named theleangentleman here has an enlarged heart… whether it’s AAS induced has yet to be determined… he ran like two fucking cycles of say
100mg test
200mg primo
Those genetically susceptible can have seriously adverse reactions over a short period of time
More than just the heart is affected by AAS (the brain: potentially predisposing one to aggression/mood swings/cognitive decline… not outright roid rage, but one can become more easily aggravated/provoked… testosterone isn’t commonly associated with this when looking at human data though… neurotoxicity is another story) kidneys and more come to mind
To be fair autonomic dysfunction/anxiety alone can give me chest pains, racing heart, sweating etc (esp if a panic attack occurs… I’ve only had a few throughout my life but they’re INCREDIBLY unpleasant)
To ME you come across as a very arrogant, impulsive individual. I applaud you for getting help, but what REALLY needs to be looked at is what factors caused you to use 1200mg for 12 months… you’re not a competitive bodybuilder, nor are you competing within any realm of athleticism. You furthermore appear to dislike being presented with data that conveys an ideology of which you disagree with. I’ve provided studies looking at both sides of the argument, there is zero bias within ALL of the data laid out when combined that I’ve provided links to a few posts prior.
Even 600mg, it was a marginal decrease (like 20%) in HDL. However cardiac parameters weren’t measured. A study implementing 200mg for 18 months found it to be well tolerated within average (typically sedentary) men. 300-600mg weekly did induce erythropoiesis to a significant extent, though no participants reached a HCT over 54% (in another trial older men appear to be more susceptible to this)
There’s another study looking over the cardiac dimensions of adults before/after one cycle (ranging up to 20-25 weeks in length)… it’s a restricted access study, but I’ve got a copy of it somewhere, I can put up screenshots here if you’d like (have to find it again)… cardiac parameters didn’t significantly change within any athlete. Some of these cycles were pretty heavy, though I believe errors were made within measuring dosage as the people conducting the study probably weren’t very apt regarding regimes used by athletes. Something like 600mg deca used over 20 weeks doesn’t add up… I think the error exists within 600mg/20wk being 600mg weekly etc
That being said
This study found 200mg test over 4 weeks had a subclinical effect on cardiac structure, whereas deca didn’t
@charlie2019 So how was your doctors appointment? Oh and stop being a child. You did this.
1 Like
The word you should be using is “Outset”, as in “from the beginning”, or when it set out. Offset is a completely unrelated word with a meaning unrelated to your sentence. In English.
You are misreading his tone and intention. Granted, he’s a little flat sometimes, he’s on the spectrum so that’s to be expected. He is telling you that you are misreading the study, and in fact you are. It does not say that there are no links between use of testosterone and heart problems, it expresses the notion cautiously as needing further study - as the limitations of this study did not extend to the conclusion on their own.
1 Like